Live data from Hacker News

NPM Bans Terminal Ads

zdnet.com

371–377 of 377 posts

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire advertising industry is scum. I worked in it for two years and wish I never did. That's a sin I now atone for by discouraging younger developers from making the same mistake, using the harshest language I think dang will permit. It doesn't matter if there is no telemetry (and if this were to be normalized, there would eventually be telemetry. Such are the economic incentives in the ad industry. When it's p…

>That's a sin I now atone for by discouraging younger developers from making the same mistake, using the harshest language I think dang will permit. I'm not against your crusade. I would suggest that instead you pick up some books on how to influence people (not talking just about Dale Carnegie here), as well as how to present an argument. Harsh language, shaming, having an absolutist/binary stance, making broad clai…

I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude that the industry is evil. The style advocated by that literature is insincere, cynical, and manipulative. Those who brushed up against it and didn't rejected it are irredeemable. Those who haven't yet corrupted themselves are the ones I hope to help, and I believe I can do so by creating a fanatical anti-advertising mob mentality that allows feelings of self-righteousness. (I am aware if the irony here, since these very techniques were turned into a science by the industry I want dismantled, but that's the way the world works.)

> Once again: All I need to do is think of one counterexample where both parties gained value (monetarily and psychologically)

You know damn well, but are unlikely to admit unless perhaps called on it, that an advertising professional that gives value to a consumer one day will be just as willing to take it the next. The advertising professional is not motivated by a desire to help the consumer and cases where that happens are incidental at best (and rare.) There is a lot of delusion in the industry too. Advertisers in the pharma space will swear themselves blue that they're helping consumers to find medication that will earnestly help them, but these advertisers are not altruists, they do I because they're paid. And more damning, their industry (pharma advertising) is illegal in other countries with good reason. But this is an industry that regularly turns its own techniques in on itself, using their rhetorical/persuasive skills on their own, to reassure their own that what they're doing is humanitarian.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That's a sin I now atone for by discouraging younger developers from making the same mistake, using the harshest language I think dang will permit. I'm not against your crusade. I would suggest that instead you pick up some books on how to influence people (not talking just about Dale Carnegie here), as well as how to present an argument. Harsh language, shaming, having an absolutist/binary stance, making broad clai…

I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude that the industry is evil. The style advocated by that literature is insincere, cynical, and manipulative. Those who brushed up against it and didn't rejected it are irredeemable. Those who haven't yet corrupted themselves are the ones I hope to help, and I beli…

>I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude that the industry is evil. The style advocated by that literature is insincere, cynical, and manipulative.

Claims without specifics or examples.

>Those who brushed up against it and didn't rejected it are irredeemable.

Very vague. No specifics.

>Those who haven't yet corrupted themselves are the ones I hope to help, and I believe I can do so by creating a fanatical anti-advertising mob mentality that allows feelings of self-righteousness.

Reminiscent of No True Scotsman.

>You know damn well, but are unlikely to admit unless perhaps called on it, that an advertising professional that gives value to a consumer one day will be just as willing to take it the next.

Attributing things to the other party in a conversation is a tried and tested method of making a conversation go downhill.

>Advertisers in the pharma space will swear themselves blue that they're helping consumers to find medication that will earnestly help them, but these advertisers are not altruists, they do I because they're paid.

I don't recall that advertisers claim to do things out of altruism. The grocery store owner down the road is not an altruist either. Nor is pretty much any non-profit entity out there. You're merely pointing out that advertisers are in the same category as all businessmen.

Quite apparent in all your comments: A willingness to preach, and not a willingness to have a conversation. Even your response to me missed pretty much the entire point of my comment. Trying to convince me that advertising is bad is a clear sign of that.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#373
post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was the correct thing to do. Considering how many npm packages the average project consumes, having even a single line of advertising for each would make npm a pain in the ass to use, and people would be looking for ways to block the ads.

Clearly, you didn't read the article from the original author. Ads were deduplicated, so only a single ad was shown, even if 500 deps used the funding dependency.

That’s a big _if_. Until now, each package with ads have rolled their own, and since there’s probably more money to be had that way, there’s no reason that would not continue.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#374
post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to disagree with your point on basic income. It’s usually called _universal_ basic income. Precisely to clarify that it is not a “charity for the destitute”, it is absolutely meant to be for everyone. And for the larger discussion on building the commons I happen to think UBI is an important component. Focusing on the amateur work being done by the civil society at least, an UBI could be precisely the th…

> I would like to disagree with your point on basic income. It’s usually called _universal_ basic income. Precisely to clarify that it is not a “charity for the destitute”, it is absolutely meant to be for everyone. In the credible UBI plans I've seen, the income is Universal in the sense that "everyone gets a check", but in practice that income is paid for by those with middle or higher incomes, such that for many e…

In case it was missed. My take in UBI outlined above would avoid this. Even better, I’m hopeful we could abolish all forms of income tax.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#376
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the $100 usually isn’t funding something critical to your org. If you are getting some key feature in return for your money most organizations will be happy to pay, a lot more than $100 really. But giving someone $100 for a product whose stated price is $0 doesn’t make as much sense.

> If you are getting some key feature in return for your money most organizations will be happy to pay, a lot more than $100 really. I don't feel this is true. How many major organizations donate or sponsor django, vue, or another major framework that's a key part of their business?

They aren't getting Django or Vue in return for their money. They get Django and Vue for free. If there's an additional feature that doesn't exist and they need someone to develop it, they are typically willing to pay for that feature.

Re: NPM Bans Terminal Ads

#377

There is a lot of concern in this thread about open source projects needing funding and they're not wrong. There are a lot of projects that are underfunded--most of them, in fact. However, it's not like the developers of and contributors to these projects naively go in thinking they're going to get paid anything. They graciously choose to make the fruits of their efforts freely available regardless of compensation. A…

I totally agree about open source devs doing it voluntarily. But I disagree they have no right to stuff terminal full of ads. It is their code - they can do whatever. Ever change their mind and license from there and into the future. Just like npmjs.org is completely in their own rights can ban such projects from enjoying benefits of the package distribution platform.

In fact, if the project was important enough, and maintainer was stubborn enough, I am sure devs community using that code would rant, but end up using it anyway, with or without npmjs.org

Post reply on HN