Live data from Hacker News

VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

plus.google.com

71–80 of 404 posts

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#71

One thing to note: When the developer tools are opened Chrome will temporarily disable the cache. When the video loops it would normally just reach into cache and re-play the file that was already downloaded. However, with devtools open it will probably re-download all the files again.

Excellent point.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#72
post #67
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We now only host ads we have sold direct. Thank you. I turned off ad blocker for your site (one is still networked to the bad guys, though...)

Thanks :) We're still talking internally about what we're going to do with the social stuff -- we're leaning towards kicking it out -- as well as the user insight we're granting to Google in return for using its (excellent) DFP to serve our own ads. Is that what you mean, or have we missed something?

I'm getting doubleclick and quantcast on the .com site.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#73
From the comments:

> Peter Dahlberg > we, the publishers, get the full blame from our readers. That's because you are to blame. As far as I know nobdoy forces you to use those shitty ad networks. Look for a honest way to finance your business and don't whine.

That actually makes a lot of sense. As long as Google et al. are making money from this, they have no incentive to change. Google, the automated rainbow monolith, in particular doesn't have any incentive to even listen.

But if publishers take the apparently extremely inconvenient step of using other networks, this sort of shit might get cleaned up. EDIT: Perhaps I should have said "other buyers;" these problems seem closely associated with the nature of ad networks.

The problem for me as a user, is how would I know the difference that such a site has, and then know that I can whitelist it?

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#74

If someone needs to have an ad solution to have their website running it is NOT a business that should exist. It's like we say restaurant owners should support the mafia because otherwise they cannot make money in the neighborhood. Or any other criminal(ish) activity. "Without advertising we wouldn't be able to run this" MAYBE it really means you shouldn't run it at all, but don't force advertising(+malware) down you…

But a lot of niche forums - games, hobbies and so forth are unlikely to monetise any other way. Should they die too? Or have to rely on a rich benefactor deciding to host a motorcycling (or whatever) site? Few are going to pay a subscription to chat on a Civilization or fishing forum a few hours a week. Advertising should be the appropriate model for this. Trouble is it's being poisoned by the greed of Buzzfeed and W…

Come on, hosting a simple website/forum is really cheap nowadays. Some websites (wikipedia being the main one) simply ask for donations at the end of the year.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#75
post #19

> A single VPAID ad absolutely demolishes site performance on mobile and desktop, and we, the publishers, get the full blame from our readers. The site is responsible for including ads; "publishers" should get the full blame from their readers. The publishers themselves can complain to the ad network they use, but readers are right to just blame the publishers.

It's not that straightforward though; these networks all pile in on each other, layers and layers deep, and in real time. It is very difficult for a publisher to work out who they are dealing with. The only network ads I had running on my news site were from Google Adsense, the seemingly reputable choice, but I found ads and trackers from all sorts of networks were infiltrating through that little window. The only re…

If the only way publishers can make money is by screwing people over then maybe the whole business model is the problem and life would be better without all those blogs.

Here's an alternative. Specialist sites sometimes sell ads directly to the advertisers without using a network. They can choose what they show, and often won't accept ads that don't relate to their users. Not really an option for a dilute gossip news blog though.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree... I know nothing about the web advertising industry or how it works with bidding and so on and I don't think I am alone. So if a site has ads then as far as I am concerned the buck stops with the them: I have no knowledge of the ad setup or what deal the site has and I don't care either - the site owner takes the responsibility and if I have a negative effect (hacked/malware/slow load or whatever) then I won…

I don't think it's a fair comparison, but I get your point. I am not saying the user should know to blame the advertiser instead of the publisher, I'm saying it really sucks that the publisher is the one getting thrown under the bus and blamed for what is the advertiser's fault and it sucks for us publishers. The suggested solution to "figure it out" and "find other advertising networks" doesn't work because almost a…

Maybe advertising is moving towards being a dead revenue model, and something else needs to take its place.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#79

If someone needs to have an ad solution to have their website running it is NOT a business that should exist. It's like we say restaurant owners should support the mafia because otherwise they cannot make money in the neighborhood. Or any other criminal(ish) activity. "Without advertising we wouldn't be able to run this" MAYBE it really means you shouldn't run it at all, but don't force advertising(+malware) down you…

> If someone needs to have an obscure ad solution to have their website running it is NOT a business that should exist. It's not a simple black/white choice in most cases. As a top 10K website publisher, you have many advertising options. Some are considered safe and user-friendly (Google, DoubleClick - IMHO no longer justified) and others less so (pop-ups, various auctioned stuff). You then get to decide on these op…

Pertaining to the same quote, obscure isn't part of the equation here. Almost all ad networks are guilty, including the biggest (i.e. the least obscure by definition) ones, like AdSense/AdX.

Re: VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks

#80

If someone needs to have an ad solution to have their website running it is NOT a business that should exist. It's like we say restaurant owners should support the mafia because otherwise they cannot make money in the neighborhood. Or any other criminal(ish) activity. "Without advertising we wouldn't be able to run this" MAYBE it really means you shouldn't run it at all, but don't force advertising(+malware) down you…

But a lot of niche forums - games, hobbies and so forth are unlikely to monetise any other way. Should they die too? Or have to rely on a rich benefactor deciding to host a motorcycling (or whatever) site? Few are going to pay a subscription to chat on a Civilization or fishing forum a few hours a week. Advertising should be the appropriate model for this. Trouble is it's being poisoned by the greed of Buzzfeed and W…

If no one pays for them, then they should die as hosting is not going to pay itself. However, launching a small forum and running it costs pennies.

The people launching it normally does it because they are passionate enough and paying 2-5$/month/admin is totally feasible.

The problem with adding a profit to niche sites is that then people start launching them JUST to get money and people land on frankenpages with malware.

Post reply on HN