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

Insane state of today's advertising part 3

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 435 posts

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#201

Post by DamonHD »

jasonkostempski wrote: post #93
Cursuviam wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been done, but they ran into trouble with New Jersey for a bit. https://www.eff.org/cases/rubin-v-new-jersey-tidbit

"And the state itself echoed the comments of Judge Furnari, noting in its press release announcing the consent order "we do not believe Tidbit was created for the purpose of invading privacy."" What about every other ad network in existence? They are specifically designed to invade privacy. Why isn't NJ going after them?

Maybe this is a "whoosh" but (legit) ad networks are specifically designed to sell ads (and thus make the network owners some money); it is hyperbole to claim that each and every one of them has only an ulterior/illegal motive in place of the stated (unpopular one).

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#202

Post by Simon_says »

Jedd wrote: post #181
Simon_says wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come'on. When your friends don't have any vested interest, it works quite well.

Agreed. Friends or colleagues who I know aren't materially invested but still have strong opinions are extremely compelling. My usual line of questioning when I have the luxury is to ask what features of $thing they don't like - usually more insightful than pros.

That's interesting. I do something similar with online reviews on Trip Advisor and Amazon: I filter to look at only 1-3 star reviews (or sometimes only 2 and 3 star reviews if there are enough). In my experience, positive reviews are all the same, but negative reviews will give really good specifics. Then you judge just the relative proportion of reviews that are positive vs. negative.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#203

Post by Vinnl »

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #189
SimeVidas wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve switched to Ghostery, and it seems to work fine. Should I go back to uBlock Origin?

Ghostery has or has had some controversial analytics called GhostRank that it collects(it may be opt-in I'm not sure). But uBlock Origin is definiently the best content filtering extension I've ever used.

It's opt-in, and has also been acquired by a company building a privacy-focused browser (I think?).

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#204

Post by fourneau »

stale2002 wrote: post #188
recursive wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone thinks advertising doesn't work on them. And everyone is wrong.

Of course advertising works. And this is a very bad thing, not a good thing.

Can you explain why it's a bad thing?

From my perspective, I've found various things via advertising that I would have never come across by other means.

A lot of people argue that "you'll just search for what you want" except I'm tired of searching for "shirt" and then scrolling for days looking for something that may work. Every once in a while I'm hit with a really good ad, and I'll click it, and maybe even buy.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#205

Post by SimeVidas »

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #189
SimeVidas wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve switched to Ghostery, and it seems to work fine. Should I go back to uBlock Origin?

Ghostery has or has had some controversial analytics called GhostRank that it collects(it may be opt-in I'm not sure). But uBlock Origin is definiently the best content filtering extension I've ever used.

I think it’s opt-in. All the “share data” checkboxes in the “Support Ghostery” panel are unchecked for me.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#206

Post by SimeVidas »

Vinnl wrote: post #203
KingMachiavelli wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ghostery has or has had some controversial analytics called GhostRank that it collects(it may be opt-in I'm not sure). But uBlock Origin is definiently the best content filtering extension I've ever used.

It's opt-in, and has also been acquired by a company building a privacy-focused browser (I think?).

From what I see, it’s a small German startup that puts emphasis on user privacy. Sounds fine to me.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#207

Post by bonqis »

DamonHD wrote: post #199
bonqis wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I co-founded Flattr and one of the things we learned is that even a one-click is to much effort. So we now have a zero-click solution that measures attention and visits in your browser locally (as Archon810 wrote.) and then your monthly subscription is distributed based on that. Happy to answer anything and or give an invite.

Would like to chat further. As CTO in a previous "fintech" start-up I tried to make something like that work: a tiny-pay-per-view is indeed something like the right goal for funding content.

Sure, drop me an mail at linus at flattr

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#208

Post by tonyedgecombe »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #197
cft wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An anecdote from 2010: my company had racks of Rackable Systems servers. Every month a server went dead- power supply, board or some such. Rackable Systems were unreliable. Then on Slashdot I saw a square ad for IBM System X servers (unfortunately they have been sold to Lenovo a couple of years ago). That somehow made me do research- although I was aware of IBM System X before. Between 2010 and 1013 we bought perhaps…

Those ads were relevant though, and (I hope) not doing thousands of requests in the background; it was an IT-related ad, on an IT-related website, targeted at a person working in IT that was interested in new servers - what really is what the better ad providers are looking for. The rest is just idk, shotgunning and hoping something sticks.

I dislike relevant ads the most because they are most likely to influence my behaviour.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#209

Post by Ntrails »

recursive wrote: post #182
oasfboasbfos wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only good ad is a dead one. With very few exceptions, especially in the consumer space, you won't need advertising if you actually need something. You'll search it out or your friends will tell you what to buy. Advertising serves as a way for the capitalist class to exert veto power over other aspects of society by yanking funding at opportune moments (see the current Google snafu or Bill O'Reilly's departure fro…

Everyone thinks advertising doesn't work on them. And everyone is wrong.

Eh, I think I've never clicked on an ad on the internet and bought a thing. The only times I've clicked on an ad that I can think of is mobile where I was trying to close something and got fucked.

So, advertising models based on clickthroughs definitely haven't worked on me. (Admittedly uBlock has reduced my exposure somewhat)

But the magazine style "increase awareness of product and hope that leads to eventual interest and purchase" probably works as well on me as anyone else.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#210

Post by PeachPlum »

erikb wrote: post #142
jdangu wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone feels the pain: Publisher gets paid on a $1 CPM basis while Cedato gets paid $5-10 CPM and pockets the difference. Advertiser thinks they paid for quality video content preroll but it's actually a tiny rectangle normally used for "display" ads. Audience is infuriated. Think about what happens on a 4G mobile plan now that VPAID has been fully migrated from Flash to JS...

And you can't even install ad blockers on the phone.

But you can install Brendan Eich's ad-blocking Brave browser

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)

Post reply on HN