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

71–80 of 236 posts

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#71

Post by [deleted] »

gglitch wrote: post #55
adblawk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just look back 50 years, how many ads an average Western person saw a day and how many today... 50 years ago the average western person had access to maybe 1/50th of the information they access to now thanks to the internet and in large part thanks to advertising. Advertising allows businesses to outsource the consideration (and associated decisions) of the value of their users. A business dependent on advertising do…

It's interesting that you bring up fairness. Your customers presumably know exactly what they're getting when they use your product. But do they know exactly who ends up with their browsing information, exactly how long those parties will have access to it, and exactly what the terms of use are for it? In other words, do they know exactly what they're paying? Edit: fwiw, I don't mean this rhetorically or combatively.…

[deleted]

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#72

Post by adblawk »

justinpombrio wrote: post #54
adblawk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just look back 50 years, how many ads an average Western person saw a day and how many today... 50 years ago the average western person had access to maybe 1/50th of the information they access to now thanks to the internet and in large part thanks to advertising. Advertising allows businesses to outsource the consideration (and associated decisions) of the value of their users. A business dependent on advertising do…

Is $15/month a real number? That sounds high to me for what you would get from advertising. For instance, if you have a CPM of $15/thousand-ad-views, then to get $15/month, your users would have to view 1000 ads a month, or 30 per day. Is that right? [EDIT] Alternatively, assuming a CPC of $0.05/click (which I gather is pretty typical, though this varies a lot), each of your users would have to click on 300 ads a mon…

The example $15/month figure is what we would need in the example to reach revenue parity if 5% of the users paid for the service and 95% did not use the service any more (no advertising revenue). A more accurate figure of each users monthly value would be $1 per user.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#73

Post by belorn »

adblawk wrote: post #43
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…

Just look back 50 years, how many ads an average Western person saw a day and how many today... 50 years ago the average western person had access to maybe 1/50th of the information they access to now thanks to the internet and in large part thanks to advertising. Advertising allows businesses to outsource the consideration (and associated decisions) of the value of their users. A business dependent on advertising do…

What is not fair is how the weak and vulnerable in society subsidize everyone else. Online advertisement is riddled with malware and ads from companies that is evading advertisement law by spending money on the online versions rather than the more regulated offline versions.

Since we are talking about fairness, how is it that publisher takes no responsibility when their website is used to distributing malware? Where is the responsibility when the advertisement on the website pry on the elderly, stealing their personal information to sell to call centers that target elderly people with fraudulent subscriptions and other schemes?

My ad blocking stays on until the advertisement market start to behave online as they have to in the offline world. That never happened for email, and my spam filter is always on as a result, and I doubt it will happen for the web.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#74

Post by adblawk »

lorenzfx wrote: post #59
adblawk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just look back 50 years, how many ads an average Western person saw a day and how many today... 50 years ago the average western person had access to maybe 1/50th of the information they access to now thanks to the internet and in large part thanks to advertising. Advertising allows businesses to outsource the consideration (and associated decisions) of the value of their users. A business dependent on advertising do…

You make it sound like your users are getting a free service. They are not. They just do not pay you directly. Why are advertisers willing to pay you $15/month per user? Because those users buy the advertisers' wares with a hefty "advertisement-tax" on top of the "real" price.

You're misunderstanding the example. Advertisers do not pay $15 per user, that's the amount we would need from 5% of our users to replace the revenue lost from no advertising. The example puts the value of each user per month at $1, which is what advertisers pay.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#75

Post by nemothekid »

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.

>Make sure you sell your Google and Facebook stocks before that time.

Kind of ironic seeing those are the two posterboys for companies going balls deep into AI.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#77

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

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…

Since when does capitalism care about the consumer if they can make at least as much money regardless?

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#78

Post by [deleted] »

adblawk wrote: post #43
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…

Just look back 50 years, how many ads an average Western person saw a day and how many today... 50 years ago the average western person had access to maybe 1/50th of the information they access to now thanks to the internet and in large part thanks to advertising. Advertising allows businesses to outsource the consideration (and associated decisions) of the value of their users. A business dependent on advertising do…

[deleted]

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#79

Post by lotsoflumens »

BenoitP wrote: post #15
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…

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…

Yes, I think that this will be the only acceptable model, ultimately.

Advertisers will pay users directly - through some kind of micro-payment process.

Users will choose which sites they use to view the ads and obtain their revenue through.

Websites will compete for users by providing services or content, that users may decide to pay for from the revenue they receive from advertisers.

The advertising abuses and the tracking will stop when users reward only the advertisers and websites that behave ethically.

The above is a simplification of course, there's a long way to go before it happens, but I think the advertising world will grudgingly accept it eventually.

Re: The Ad Blocking Wars

#80

Post by ikurei »

lorenzfx wrote: post #59
adblawk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just look back 50 years, how many ads an average Western person saw a day and how many today... 50 years ago the average western person had access to maybe 1/50th of the information they access to now thanks to the internet and in large part thanks to advertising. Advertising allows businesses to outsource the consideration (and associated decisions) of the value of their users. A business dependent on advertising do…

You make it sound like your users are getting a free service. They are not. They just do not pay you directly. Why are advertisers willing to pay you $15/month per user? Because those users buy the advertisers' wares with a hefty "advertisement-tax" on top of the "real" price.

Not that I agree with them, but their point seemed to be that their service is accesible to all, independently of their wealth. That close, but not the same as free.
Post reply on HN