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

Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

contributor.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 269 posts

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#111

Post by youdontknowtho »

Wow. I'm really (sounds strange saying this to myself) excited about this Google project.

I really hope this works out. As much as I dislike advertising...and Google...something has to happen. The "ad blocker" - "ad blocker blocker" arms race is patently stupid. There has to be a way to get money to content providers so they can opt out of the madness. Google will still be able to provide them with all the sweet sweet surveillance data that they thrive on.

One problem at a time, I guess.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#112

Post by youdontknowtho »

wand3r wrote: post #103
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

Brave Software

I'm also a fan of what Brave is doing.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#113

Post by FroshKiller »

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

I think you're conflating the Web and the commercial portion of the Web.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#116

Post by brianwawok »

josteink wrote: post #109
lathiat wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish they would launch this; I happily pay $10/month for YouTube Red right now for exactly this.

> I wish they would launch this; I happily pay $10/month for YouTube Red right now for exactly this. And here I wish I could pay for YouTube Red. From what I've heard, YouTube Red users get Google Play Music for free. Ironically, I pay Google more than $10 a month for Google Play Music alone, but they won't let me pay for YouTube Red, even if I want to. Why? God knows. If they're going to be the gatekeepers to paid o…

I don't think Google makes the laws around distribution of music. Try talking to the RIAA and friends.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#117

Post by brianwawok »

Leynos wrote: post #34

This doesn't seem that useful to me as only a small number of sites (none of which I visit) support it. Hypothetical question: If I were allowed to bid on my own ad impressions - and if I won an auction, no ad would be shown - how much would it cost a month for me to see no adverts? (I realize this is heavily dependent upon the type of sites that are involved, so I guess take the average HN user as an example).

So each ad gets a quality score based on clicks. After a few days of no clicks, your own ads would be pulled for a higher quality and more profitable ad would replace it.

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#118

Post by jevgeni »

Sir_Substance wrote: post #105
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

>A model like this is necessary to support quality content online. It's totally not. People essentially enjoy creating and sharing, and love putting up quality content about things they truly give a shit about. The internet was built on people writing massive forums posts about completely stripping down Kawasaki motorbike engines, and hosting their own websites where they ramble about conditional probability. Wikiped…

So who pays for the servers?

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#119

Post by [deleted] »

Sir_Substance wrote: post #105
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

>A model like this is necessary to support quality content online. It's totally not. People essentially enjoy creating and sharing, and love putting up quality content about things they truly give a shit about. The internet was built on people writing massive forums posts about completely stripping down Kawasaki motorbike engines, and hosting their own websites where they ramble about conditional probability. Wikiped…

[deleted]

Re: Google Contributor: Buy an ad removal pass for the web

#120

Post by zoul »

Sir_Substance wrote: post #105
BoiledCabbage wrote: post #15

Whether it comes from Google, or someone else I believe this is the only way the web survives. Content creators need to be able to charge different amounts for different quality content. In depth, well researched reporting needs to be able to earn more than a buzzfeed article. That's not possible with a flat "per-eyeball" cost, where the revenue to the content creator is uncorrelated with the cost to create or the va…

>A model like this is necessary to support quality content online. It's totally not. People essentially enjoy creating and sharing, and love putting up quality content about things they truly give a shit about. The internet was built on people writing massive forums posts about completely stripping down Kawasaki motorbike engines, and hosting their own websites where they ramble about conditional probability. Wikiped…

Not all quality content can be produced in spare time as a labour of love. High quality journalism, for example.
Post reply on HN