Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ad Blocking Wars

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 236 posts

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#31

Post by the-dude »

mschuster91 wrote: post #17
BenoitP wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe there is space (as in: market space) for user controlled advertising? : Publisher gets a cut, for providing a place for the ad, having made the consumer come to it, and also for providing information on the consumer's interests. This is the current situation. But the consumer would get a cut too. For renting his pixels, his CPU, his internet connection, his eyes, his brain. He would get to veto types o…

Not really. The concept is definitely interesting, but it will fail with the consumer masses. What is really needed is a concept for micro-transactions - transactions that may even go down to fractions of a cent! If you're a newspaper and you're trying to sell an article (e.g.) for 20 cents, it's not possible unless you use Bitcoin, and even then it's a hassle. Adblock Plus might actually be in the position to introd…

Blendle does this. Blendle.com

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#32

Post by michaelbuckbee »

amelius wrote: post #25
mschuster91 wrote: post #3

Advertising is the maybe best example of Capitalism going raving mad. We consumers tell the media with every single installation of Adblock: fuck off, we don't want to be data-mined. We don't want to be interrupted every time we open a new tab that we might like a penis enlargement. And especially: WE CONSUMERS FUCKING HATE THE LIES OF ADVERTISING. Prior to the internet, people tended to actually believe what adverti…

Relax. Within 10 years, we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin, so that they can be stripped from any content, be it text, images, or video. Make sure you sell your Google and Facebook stocks before that time.

Ironically, one of the big moves that AdBlockers are prompting is a push to more social advertising and in app advertising as it's blocked so much less.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#33

Post by PantaloonFlames »

officialchicken wrote: post #13
gyardley wrote: post #12

Online advertising is a perfect example of the tragedy of the commons, where that commons is the general public's attention. Any individual publisher or advertiser can do a little bit better by surpassing what the general public finds acceptable, but when enough of them do this some of the general public resorts to ad blockers - causing overall ad revenues to decline, which causes more publishers and advertisers to p…

At the end of the day, we all agree that shining shit is their job. Media/Ad buyers and sellers need to realize that there are 2 issues (intrusive ads and tracking) at play, not one. The IAB can't deflect on "bad actors" too much longer and they know it - that campaign has run it's course. They have to correct their own behavior and not modify ours as they're naturally inclined to try.

> we all agree that shining shit is their job.

I don't know about that. I'm a consumer. I use the internet to search for things I'm considering for purchase. Tires for my automobile, landscaping services, holiday trips. After searching (and prior to adblock sw), I'd see ads related to my searches. They were relevant.

Many (most?) ads are horsepucky and annoying. Some are not.

I am not defending ad-based models for dissemination of information and news as the one true way. Just disagreeing with your extreme statement.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#34

Post by PantaloonFlames »

amelius wrote: post #25
mschuster91 wrote: post #3

Advertising is the maybe best example of Capitalism going raving mad. We consumers tell the media with every single installation of Adblock: fuck off, we don't want to be data-mined. We don't want to be interrupted every time we open a new tab that we might like a penis enlargement. And especially: WE CONSUMERS FUCKING HATE THE LIES OF ADVERTISING. Prior to the internet, people tended to actually believe what adverti…

Relax. Within 10 years, we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin, so that they can be stripped from any content, be it text, images, or video. Make sure you sell your Google and Facebook stocks before that time.

> we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin,

Cool. Actually, right now, I have NI* that does that.

*Natural intelligence.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#35

Post by icebraining »

tosseraccount wrote: post #22
icebraining wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contacting the mothership doesn't help. The way it works is that an ad network loaded by site A sets a cookie with a new random ID. When you go to site B with the same ad network, since the ads are served from the same domain (the ad network's), it can read the cookie with the ID and link the two website visits. If ads came from the sites own domains, this wouldn't work.

They know your domain, your IP address, your referer, your screen size, your OS, your browser version, your supported MIME types, your port number, your plugins, your ISP. That should be enough information for cooperating servers to target an ad.

Often yes, but that breaks easily. Referers are often not sent nowadays. Screen size and OS are often similar. Browsers now auto-update, so the versions are increasingly the same, along with plugins, which are getting rarer. Port numbers vary by connection, so you can't match them. IP address don't work well for people behind NAT, which is particularly common for mobile connections, which often have carrier-grade NAT[1], and for workplace/university/school networks.

Say you have two users on Macbook Airs using auto-updating Chrome (which has bundled Flash) in the same office or university, and both came in through Google.

Is this an unlikely scenario? Not really.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#36

Post by jcrawfordor »

BenoitP wrote: post #20
hammock wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do you believe there is space (as in: market space) for user controlled advertising? Aka permission-based marketing. Most common examples being email and SMS subscriptions. Most studies of marketers actually conclude that email marketing is their most effective tactic. Don't overthink it.

That could be a quite convincing argument to present to advertisers. Honestly grabbed attention would transform better.

I feel like there's a fine line there that a lot of providers don't get. I am the type of person who reads every single email in my inbox, and I also don't mind subscribing for updates on things.... when those make sense. A service that honestly emails me from time to time when they release new versions or add new features is valuable to me and will keep getting its emails delivered to my inbox, and probably see a high clickthrough rate. A service that, like most, feels the need to email me at least weekly with pointless articles? No.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#37

Post by melted »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #32
amelius wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relax. Within 10 years, we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin, so that they can be stripped from any content, be it text, images, or video. Make sure you sell your Google and Facebook stocks before that time.

Ironically, one of the big moves that AdBlockers are prompting is a push to more social advertising and in app advertising as it's blocked so much less.

None of the apps I have on my phone have ads in them. And before you ask, no I don't have FB or any of the other "social" apps. I prefer to spend a buck or two to not see the ads.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#38

Post by mschuster91 »

PantaloonFlames wrote: post #34
amelius wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relax. Within 10 years, we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin, so that they can be stripped from any content, be it text, images, or video. Make sure you sell your Google and Facebook stocks before that time.

> we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin, Cool. Actually, right now, I have NI* that does that. *Natural intelligence.

> Cool. Actually, right now, I have NI* that does that.

Yes, and it takes an enormous toll on your brain. Seriously, I really feel tired after having to use a non-adblocking computer...

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#39

Post by adrusi »

amelius wrote: post #25
mschuster91 wrote: post #3

Advertising is the maybe best example of Capitalism going raving mad. We consumers tell the media with every single installation of Adblock: fuck off, we don't want to be data-mined. We don't want to be interrupted every time we open a new tab that we might like a penis enlargement. And especially: WE CONSUMERS FUCKING HATE THE LIES OF ADVERTISING. Prior to the internet, people tended to actually believe what adverti…

Relax. Within 10 years, we have AI that is strong enough to recognize advertisements regardless of origin, so that they can be stripped from any content, be it text, images, or video. Make sure you sell your Google and Facebook stocks before that time.

I'm not sure that'll be so easy: the holy grail of ads is to be indistinguishable from content to people. I don't think it's at all certain that AI could ever beat humans at this, controlling for the possibility of strong AI.

All that powerful adblocking tools will do is force native advertising to become dominant.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#40

Post by jasode »

tosseraccount wrote: post #22
icebraining wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contacting the mothership doesn't help. The way it works is that an ad network loaded by site A sets a cookie with a new random ID. When you go to site B with the same ad network, since the ads are served from the same domain (the ad network's), it can read the cookie with the ID and link the two website visits. If ads came from the sites own domains, this wouldn't work.

They know your domain, your IP address, your referer, your screen size, your OS, your browser version, your supported MIME types, your port number, your plugins, your ISP. That should be enough information for cooperating servers to target an ad.

>They know your domain, your IP address, [...]

Yes, they can try to "fingerprint" your browser into a unique hash but that method is more reliable for desktops than mobile phones.

Imagine a dozens of customers with identical iPhones sharing the wifi at Starbucks or the airport. (Everybody has the same ip address.) Sniffing for unique markers such as counting installed fonts and/or plugins isn't going to work on smartphones like it does on deskttops. Therefore, generating a cookie with an id is more reliable. Of course, people can negate that by configuring their phones to block cookies but it appears that most consumers don't do it (probably because it breaks other things such as banking, sports, etc websites.)

Since advertising revenue from mobiles is growing faster than desktops, and in some cases exceeds it (Twitter mobile ads), it doesn't look like ad networks will favor fingerprinting over cookies. (That's not to say some sophisticated ad networks don't blend both techniques.)

Post reply on HN