I did buy ppk on Javascript, I would never have done so without Quirks mode website. So there's that
The web's original sin
81–90 of 132 posts
Re: The web's original sin
#82I subscribe to Pandora to block the ads. That's a viable business model. I am stunned by the amount of crap that comes my way when I happen to browse without an adblocker. Advertisers went too far, and now there's a counterreaction. I understand many media businesses are not viable without lots of advertising, but no one is preventing them from adopting a subscription model. The problem is that it's easier to dupe advertisers into thinking consumers will like content than it is to convince consumers to like content. If consumers really like content, they will subscribe to it. All that has happened is that the curtain on advertising effectiveness has been lifted, and buyers of ads are getting a better deal along with consumers. The media enjoyed decades of profitability due more to a lack of competition than a high-quality product. I don't pity them.
Re: The web's original sin
#83There was no paywall for this page, so I refused to read it.
It's what the author would want.
Re: The web's original sin
#84I'd say JavaScript instead of a strongly typed client-side interpreter. Or maybe the ability to execute binary blobs that's cross browser compatible (similar to Flash, yeah I know, ActiveScript is essentially JS, or ActiveX) but sand-boxed fully and is open source to be integrated across browsers vs independent development.
Re: The web's original sin
#85When I open my mouth to talk to my neighbor, I am not producing "content" - I am communicating. The Web is a communication medium. The lack of commercial functionality baked in the communication medium is a feature not a bug. Whoever uses the word "content" betray his bias as a commercial publisher.
Have you ever spent any significant amount of time writing something, or making a video, or an image for the web?
Never heard of FOSS & GNU I take it? What a bunch of chumps, right? Linux, what a scam.
Re: The web's original sin
#86This medium/protocol (HTTP) is built in a way that I can choose how I render the information I get using the programs of my choice or the code that I write. Those who wish to prevent this autonomy can create a new medium, device, protocol, file format, or program, to push their advertising so that there is no choice.
As long as I keep telling web sites "Do Not Track" me, and everyone keeps ignoring me, then I will continue to run ad blockers. If you want to stalk my movements, store the information, aggregate this data with everyone else's, and sell it so that advertising can follow me around through the documents that I read, then I will continue to block ads.
Re: The web's original sin
#87"I’m seriously questioning the idea that all content on the web ought to be free." It shouldn't, and it isn't. But free and good enough is going to beat any cost and better by any amount for most people most of the time. "The expectation that everything online is free is an entitlement, an unearned privilege, on the part of consumers. There’s nothing inevitable about it." Looking at the huge, swollen, abusive and scl…
So charge for it. I don't see what the big deal is.
I've built a good amount of software. I never did any of it for free, although it's why I've never came up with anything like Facebook, etc. I could never figure out how the 'magic' of making money off ads worked. Google's makes sense, pr0n websites to an extent. Everything else is largely not worth it or fighting in a world where everyone else gives it away for free (news, etc.).
Re: The web's original sin
#88I would love to have a thoughtful, Civ-like game on my phone. Its a Samsung Galaxy 5 with a 128gig micro-sd card. I know its powerful enough, but if its out there, I haven't found it. I, and many others, happily pay for such games on PC and gaming platforms, but on phones and Web, it seems oddly taboo. P.S. I'm not goving up my blockers on my computer browser. They aren't "ad" blockers; they're malware protection. To…
The Final Fantasy Tactics port to iOS is actually quite good. I played it on my iPad, and it seemed almost perfectly suited to a touch interface. The only issue was a slight interaction delay/misfire for when I would press on-screen buttons, but since it's not a twitch game, it's a minor thing.
There's an Android port as well, for $13. That's a great price to play a great game - although I'm not sure how well it plays on a phone.
For the most part, I do agree with your sentiment: the gaming experiences I have read about, seen and experienced on smartphones and tablets tend to not be what I'm looking for. For example, I started playing Bastion on my iPad, but eventually stopped because I really want a gamepad for that kind of game. Same with a lot of the other Square ports.
Re: The web's original sin
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know about the OP, but I'd say many objections to "content" is less to do with it describing a web composed of documents and more to do with it describing a web composed of documents conceived as a means rather than an end. "Content" is to a large extend marketing shorthand for "text which improves our conversion funnel or sells CPM slots by being well optimised for search queries and/or social clicks". Which…
"Content" is to a large extend marketing shorthand for "text which improves our conversion funnel or sells CPM slots by being well optimised for search queries and/or social clicks". I guess that's the disconnect. I see that some people use it that way, but to me it's far more broad than that. I would certainly refer to blogs and other such things as "content" too.
Maybe the most widely-agreed-upon definition of "content" is "others' writing and things they publish".
Consider NSBlog, a fantastic blog full of interesting and useful information for programming for OS X and iOS. I don't think of my blog as a content source, but I do think of NSBlog as one.
I wonder under what conditions mikeash thinks of his blog as "content" — as far as I remember, the only time I think of my blog/website as content is when I'm looking at the whole thing and thinking "Man, there's not much here. I should write more often." However, when I'm writing something that goes on it, I don't think of myself as "producing content", I think of what I'm doing as _writing_.
Maybe people call things "content" only when they're sufficiently removed from the specifics of what is being written/filmed/drawn?
Re: The web's original sin
#90Is it really an original sin if ad-financed free content is, as the article indicates, a mere .275% of the online economy? > The price difference between desktop apps and tablet/mobile apps does not make any sense, but everybody pretends it does. I dunno, it makes a lot of sense to me: my phone has a screen which is under 11 sq. inches while my monitor is over 300 sq. inches, for a more than 28-fold difference in vie…
>ad-financed free content is, as the article indicates, a mere .275% of the online economy?
That's the percentage of advertising income as a fraction of something like "Internet GDP" which is misleading. For them to be comparable, you would have to pad the advertising figure to account for job creation, etc.
It's probably more interesting to compare total internet advertising revenue to total internet ecommerce revenue. For 2014, global internet advertising revenue was around $140 billion USD, where global B2C ecom was around $1400 billion USD. About a 1:10 ratio.