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

251–260 of 435 posts

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#251

Post by Macha »

mirimir wrote: post #168
rahimnathwani wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the ads were static (e.g. advertiser A bought a specific place on one of publisher B's pages, for a month), and advertiser A didn't want independent verification that the ads were seen, then your proposal could be simply implemented. "What am I missing?" Many ads are served after real-time auction: whilst your browser is loading and rendering the page, an auction is going between advertisers for the ad spot(s) on…

So what happens when ads are being blocked? Does the real-time auction still occur?

No, usually the ad blockers will block the SSP's script which (depending on implementation) is either responsible for managing the auction, or calling a server which manages the auction. In theory it's possible for the adblocked to miss the SSP but block the eventual winner of the auction and at least on the demand side, we don't pay out for the lack of an impression (not sure of the terms between SSPs and publisher as to which of the two end up eating the lost opportunity, but I suspect the SSP's push it back to the publisher)

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#252

Post by the8472 »

amelius wrote: post #173
richdougherty wrote: post #170

I wish ads were sandboxed and given resource limits. I'd like - network limits (rate limited, bandwith capped), animation limits (low fps), sound limits (no sound), CPU usage limits (not much CPU - maybe a burst at page load), etc. Maybe a sandbox option for an iframe?

If it was in Google's interests, we'd probably have that already.

maybe they could be incentivized getting a feature into adblockers that makes them a little more lenient towards sandboxed iframes as opposed to cross-origin javascript

maybe make it part of the "acceptable ads" requirements

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#253

Post by mdpopescu »

exikyut wrote: post #64

IMO the way to solve this is a single-click "pay this tiny amount to keep reading" UI. Now that Amazon's one-click checkout patent has expired this is actually legally viable. But it won't happen until Chrome is overturned by a new browser because Google will never let such a model succeed :( It's possible Firefox may successfully do the "phoenix re-viral" thing, in spite of the fact that it would be a literal miracl…

The problem changes from "tiny amount" to "I have to make yet another decision". Decision fatigue is a thing.

Something like bonqis mentions where the amount of attention I give to each page is automatically measured would be much better.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#254

Post by mdpopescu »

bonqis wrote: post #177
exikyut wrote: post #64

IMO the way to solve this is a single-click "pay this tiny amount to keep reading" UI. Now that Amazon's one-click checkout patent has expired this is actually legally viable. But it won't happen until Chrome is overturned by a new browser because Google will never let such a model succeed :( It's possible Firefox may successfully do the "phoenix re-viral" thing, in spite of the fact that it would be a literal miracl…

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.

Do you generate reports with how much was spent on each site? If I were using such a browser / add-on, that would make for an interesting reading at least once in a while.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#255

Post by Macha »

aryamaan wrote: post #234
aeleos wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are still looking for an ad blocker, I have had great experiences with ublock origin.

Any advantages over adBlock?

Their acceptable ads policy turned into "pay to whitelist" which basically pissed people off on all sides. The advertiser's weren't happy about being held to ransom, the users weren't happy with ad blockers that didn't.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#256

Post by dEnigma »

romanovcode wrote: post #250
dEnigma wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been a uBlock version for Edge for quite a while now; or am I missing something? https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/ublock-origin/9nblgg...

Yeah but it's a fork to work with Edge. But AFAIK Edge can work with all webextensions because it is using exactly the same APIs as Firefox.

Ah, interesting, I hadn't heard about that. Seems like it should work in Edge then, at least with minimal changes:

WebExtensions APIs are inspired by the existing Google Chrome extension APIs, and are supported by Opera, Firefox, and Microsoft Edge. [1]

On the other hand the Edge version seems to no longer be very actively maintained, but the original repository[2] still links to the Edge repository[3] for installation.

[1]https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/WebExtensions/Wh... [2]https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/ [3]https://github.com/nikrolls/uBlock-Edge/

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#257

Post by winterlight »

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.

My browsing experience on a mobile phone stepped up greatly since I started using Firefox Focus. You don't even need to mess around with plugins because ad blocking is already a built-in core feature.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#258

Post by Freak_NL »

TekMol wrote: post #236

I wonder how much junk like this gets through Adsense. I would have thought Google keeps the ads on their network under tight control. But I see tons of requests to other domains even on pages with just one Adsense ad and no other external content. Example: googlesyndication.com google.com voicefive.com gwallet.com doubleclick.net doubleverify.com mediaplex.com scorecardresearch.com t4ft.de r1-cdn.net afy11.net dotom…

Trackers, beacons, telemetry; stuff to follow you around the internet and compile a profile on you.

Re: Insane state of today's advertising part 3

#260

Post by self_awareness »

CapsAdmin wrote: post #247
dhab wrote: post #164

Might be off-topic. It seems a majority of people are against ads. What are the top few reasons why people dislike ads, excluding reasons such as them just being a nuisance? My own guesses are: * People don't like the idea that the platform serving the ads is making money through ads which is not directly tied to the main value they derive from that platform * Maybe people feel that they are also indirectly contribut…

I think for me it's mostly about not being in control over the content I choose to view. I'm the kind of person who want involuntary ads to disappear entirely (so basically all ads on the internet). But at the same time I don't mind reading about new products, services, cheap offers etc as long as I can control when. I look at ads in real life in grocery stores. Here in Norway (and I would assume elsewhere but I don'…

My thoughts exactly. If put in one place, maybe they would start competing for attention by increasing their quality. Because today's ads are at their lowest quality possible.
Post reply on HN