Live data from Hacker News

Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

wsj.com

231–240 of 462 posts

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more like "don't come in to use the AC and shade in the store if you're not going to buy anything". I am not making an opinion on the practice, only on your analogy.

That's not bad actually. Hanging out on FB with and ad blocker is literally loitering in their servers. You are racking up costs for them and actively refusing to provide value in return. IHMO, it would be very reasonable for FB to deny service to ad-block users. But, I understand they'd rather attempt to keep you around first.

Your mere presence provides value for them as you are part of the reason why your friends are on FB.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#233

They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. As long as they don't try to force some sort of legislation on how people can use their internet connection, and their internet browser to fetch and display content, there's no problem. The real problem is Facebook is already full of advertising disguised as content. From sponsored posts to content from things you "like". So I'm kind of surprised…

> They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. Technically, Facebook could insert news feed ads like a post from one of your friend (assume that the friend has liked some page or organization). It could be tough to distinguish between ads and posts much like native advertising.

I'd bet their terms allow them to impersonate your own friends.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#234

They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. As long as they don't try to force some sort of legislation on how people can use their internet connection, and their internet browser to fetch and display content, there's no problem. The real problem is Facebook is already full of advertising disguised as content. From sponsored posts to content from things you "like". So I'm kind of surprised…

> They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. Technically, Facebook could insert news feed ads like a post from one of your friend (assume that the friend has liked some page or organization). It could be tough to distinguish between ads and posts much like native advertising.

That was what I was referring to here: > Facebook is already full of advertising disguised as content. From sponsored posts to content from things you "like". So I'm kind of surprised they need to go out of their way to explicitly announce that they will be disguising ads. They already have the power to inject it in the middle of content invisibly.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#235

They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. As long as they don't try to force some sort of legislation on how people can use their internet connection, and their internet browser to fetch and display content, there's no problem. The real problem is Facebook is already full of advertising disguised as content. From sponsored posts to content from things you "like". So I'm kind of surprised…

I worked for a company that got most of its revenue from online ads. When I started, adblockers were 20%. When it got up to 35% the boss decided to take action. We hired a third party anti-adblocker, and it worked great. It went back and forth with the adblockers as they updated to block our anti-blocking. Most adblock extensions use some standard rules-lists, similar to email spam lists like Spamhaus. I guess we pis…

Slightly off-topic, but I have to ask: have you tried (or considered) hosting your own ads?

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#236
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook's profitability is not your problem. It's their job to figure out how to get paid. It's your job to protect your mind. Targeted ads are worse than gambling. We made sure everyone's aware of the dangers of gambling, but everyone's in the dark about targeted ads. These companies know what they're doing. If people want to portray ad blocking as stealing, so be it. Steal from them. They deserve it.

> Facebook's profitability is not your problem. No, but acting with honesty and fairness is. Facebook is asking you not to use their service if you are going to block ads. I think it's obvious that the "right" thing to do is to respect their wishes, not sneeringly defy them while using their resources and giving nothing in return.

> Giving them nothing in return.

You're giving them a lot, even if you don't click on ads or see ads. Is it not clear that your data is valuable? You're giving them personal information. Not that people that aren't developers care.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#237
post #210
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't suck up my bandwidth on your crappy attitude. You know facebook is ad supported. If you don't want to look at ads, why do you keep going there?

> why do you keep going there? Have you ever considered that some contents are only available there? It's more the fault of some users that post required informations there, but it's a reality. Personally I rarely go there, and would rather never have to go there.

additionally: FB forces itself into your life by adding tracking on non-FB sites. Even if I never go to FB, they can still track me, and sell my data.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#238
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook's profitability is not your problem. It's their job to figure out how to get paid. It's your job to protect your mind. Targeted ads are worse than gambling. We made sure everyone's aware of the dangers of gambling, but everyone's in the dark about targeted ads. These companies know what they're doing. If people want to portray ad blocking as stealing, so be it. Steal from them. They deserve it.

> Facebook's profitability is not your problem. No, but acting with honesty and fairness is. Facebook is asking you not to use their service if you are going to block ads. I think it's obvious that the "right" thing to do is to respect their wishes, not sneeringly defy them while using their resources and giving nothing in return.

There is absolutely nothing dishonest about only downloading and rendering the web content you want to view.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#239
Arrogance from a seller of a good or service alienates/pisses off their customers.

SCENE: You walk into a large retail TV/tech/stereo store. There are monitors displaying ads. NOT in a ubiquitous way; in an annoying ubiquitous way (ie. every 5 feet you walk in the store aisles, a monitor drops from the ceiling and displays an ad and you get used to counting your steps and every 5 feet you have to duck around the ad-bearing monitor).

You find a device online that disables the 'monitor drop' and bring it with you to that store.

Staff notice this and tell you "either turn off your device or leave."

What will you do? Phucking leave and never come back, that's what.

What if Best Buy was the dominant seller of TV/tech/stereos and the only place to get the Best Buy experience?

Monopolies don't last. Especially arrogant monopolies. It might take a while but if Best Buy was forcing people to view ads every time they visit the store -- and their customers started not showing up after being harassed by staff to 'stop using your monitor-drop blocker device' --

Best Buy would either

1) stop annoying their customers and find other ways to monetize

2) go out of business

The thing that people may forget here is the arrogant belief of this particular monopolist (Zuckerberg et al). That belief is "we got them locked, they can't get this experience anywhere else, we're #1"). Well that's a mistake on their part.

Can you imagine Jeff Bezos saying "effective immediately we're employing a FB ad model and stopping our users from ad-blocking -- I want more money."

Bezos is 100% opposite Zuckerberg. - Bezos knows Amazon is the monopoly - and yet he still he busts his bauls to make the site as non-annoying as possible; read a case study of how much attention Jeff pays to no-friction interaction for users of the Amazon site

Arrogant monopolists die. Zuckerberg needs to find a different way to monetize.

The mere fact that the dummazz thinks so little of his users that he comes up with "we'll force them to consume ads" instead of a Bezos "make users as happy as possible" shows Zuckerberg is an azz.

But then we all knew that because he stole the FB idea from someone else. NO FREAKING RESPECT. No respect extended from the guy -- so NONE GIVEN.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#240
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like how Microsoft wouldn't miss people that pirate windows?

What?!

Sorry, I made a quick reference without the link.

"Jeff Raikes, head of the company's business group, said at a recent investor conference that while the company is against piracy, if you are going to pirate software, it hopes you pirate Microsoft software" (http://www.informationweek.com/if-youre-going-to-steal-softw...)

i.e, in the context of Facebook, a ad-blocking user is better than a non-user, since the non-user might then be using a competitor platform and encourage current ad-viewing users/developers to switch to it.

Post reply on HN