Live data from Hacker News

Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

github.com

111–120 of 278 posts

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#111
Nice! Wanted to try something similar for a while using SDR to capture FM radio and start switching radio stations when the radio jockey starts speaking i.e. automatically switch stations when songs are not playing.

The Radio jockeys here (India) have started promoting ads as part of their regular content without any disclaimers or mentions that it is a promotion. e.g. They just say, 'you should put your child in this college for 100% placement' without mentioning they are being sponsored to say so.

So, just adblocker wont cut; I need (RJ+ad) blocker. I might have a jumpstart thanks to this project!

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it's perfectly fine to block ads. And that ad blockers' primary feature is blocking ads. At the same time, I think most ads aren't malicious. They aren't "intending to do harm". Ads sell things. Sometimes things people want. I'd guess that most people who use ad blockers just don't like being sold things.

The point of ads is to create demand where none existed, as much as adtech people want to pretend thats merely via informing people of all these wonderful products they were previously unaware of (which I admit, does happen), the vast majority of advertising is trying to convince you to buy useless shit you don't need, or even worse, stuff that actively harms you. (these are the most profitable things, thus the most…

> Closely study some ads sometimes, they are incredibly psychologically manipulative.

Also, study the 101 of the domain. Like the famous Cialdini's book Influence: Science and Practice, or Cliff Ennico's How To Sell Anything To Anybody talks. Moral bankrupcy is in the very DNA of the practice, so no surprise that most ads just reflect this.

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a reason ad blockers are called "ad blockers", and not "tracking protectors" or "privacy protectors" or "malware protectors" (the latter three being their own category of software). It's because they exist precisely for blocking ads "just for the sake of blocking ads". Ads are malicious. It's perfectly fine to block them. Privacy protection is just a convenient side effect.

I agree that it's perfectly fine to block ads. And that ad blockers' primary feature is blocking ads. At the same time, I think most ads aren't malicious. They aren't "intending to do harm". Ads sell things. Sometimes things people want. I'd guess that most people who use ad blockers just don't like being sold things.

> Ads sell things. Sometimes things people want.

You've captured my issue right in this place. Ads sometimes sell things people want. All the other times are what I consider doing harm.

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is people are willing to pay for certain products with their attention, via ads, but not with money. Given the choice of paying $1 for a podcast or pirating said podcast, sufficient number of people would not choose the first option to make it a viable business.

In fairness, $1 for a podcast episode is egregious. Almost no one would pay that. Piracy has gone down a lot in the past 15 years because content owners made reasonable decisions.

It's really not egregious. Just like $1/song is not egregious. $1/podcast episode (often 60 minutes or more) is some of the best time/$ value among a-la-carte entertainment products.

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has not been established. In fact, the whole music, video and computer game industries are evidence of the opposite - even before DRM and convenient streaming/store platforms on-line, piracy was still just a drop in a bucket and businesses asking for money up front were perfectly viable.

People prefer free over paying all the time. Just see all of us wanting to avoid paying for the environmental externalities. The only reason people don’t choose free over paying is if the convenience or cost is worth it. For music, organizing and having easy access to all music files is worth $10/month or less to many people versus risking copyright infringement charges. But raise that to $100/month, and see what peo…

And people prefer paid over free all the time. Many of us are loaded with a dozen+ subscriptions. I have Netflix, Spotify, Prime Video, HBO, Showtime, Apple Arcade, iCloud Storage, EA Access, Xbox Game Pass, Adobe Creative Cloud, NY Times all as subscriptions, and countless paid apps and solutions. I'm far from alone in this. Clearly millions of people pay enormous sums for good products.

The problem is that often it's hard to get anything but an ad-buttressed solution because everyone wants to double-dip (e.g. NYTimes, Hulu). Further the conversation often comes up for things that have lower value, but the creators hope it's their payday. There are countless podcasts that seem low effort -- usually a group of guys chatting with no preparation or work about things -- that I have to imagine people turn on as background noise, but if faced with a pay wall would abandon quickly (examples would be Accidental Tech Podcast or the like, the Daring Fireball one, etc -- the "how can I print money with zero work" podcasts).

There are others that are absolutely brilliant that are worth it but have some byzantine, many-islands, poorly supported way of funding them -- Anthropocene Review, 99% Invisible, Hidden Brain, etc. As we get into a small number of large podcast subscription services I expect a lot of them will see great results.

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is people are willing to pay for certain products with their attention, via ads, but not with money. Given the choice of paying $1 for a podcast or pirating said podcast, sufficient number of people would not choose the first option to make it a viable business.

> The problem is people are willing to pay for certain products with their attention, via ads, but not with money. 1. People who are adblocking are saying that they are not willing to pay with attention. You can only compare their relative willingness to pay with attention vs money when you provide both options fairly. 2. I don't take it as given that businesses have the right to make money however they want. There a…

> 1. People who are adblocking are saying that they are not willing to pay with attention.

No.

As a person who's adblocking, that is not what I'm saying. I'm perfectly willing to pay with attention; I'm not willing to pay with my data, I'm not willing to be tracked across sites, and I'm not willing to let my browser execute whatever garbage the ad network is sending down the pipe at me.

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has not been established. In fact, the whole music, video and computer game industries are evidence of the opposite - even before DRM and convenient streaming/store platforms on-line, piracy was still just a drop in a bucket and businesses asking for money up front were perfectly viable.

People prefer free over paying all the time. Just see all of us wanting to avoid paying for the environmental externalities. The only reason people don’t choose free over paying is if the convenience or cost is worth it. For music, organizing and having easy access to all music files is worth $10/month or less to many people versus risking copyright infringement charges. But raise that to $100/month, and see what peo…

That's just how market works.

> The only reason people don’t choose free over paying is if the convenience or cost is worth it.

This is how you make a profitable business even if free alternatives (like piracy) exist. Steam managed to pull that off for videogames (their DRM is unfortunate, but it's only part of the equation here).

> an additional problem is if a vendor provides a service for free or cheaper with ads, people choose that one over one that is paid

That's very true. It's why I argue ad-based models should be made illegal. They're distorting the market, as it's very hard to compete with "free, but monetizes your sanity and/or your data".

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is people are willing to pay for certain products with their attention, via ads, but not with money. Given the choice of paying $1 for a podcast or pirating said podcast, sufficient number of people would not choose the first option to make it a viable business.

In fairness, $1 for a podcast episode is egregious. Almost no one would pay that. Piracy has gone down a lot in the past 15 years because content owners made reasonable decisions.

I pay $5/month for a podcast that releases weekly.

But you're right, I'm just an anecdote drop in a fairly small bucket.

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#119

Neat software, but I think this is less defensible than other ad blockers. With web ad blockers you protect against tracking, privacy violations and potentially malware and thus don't see "unacceptable ads". In contrast this seems to be about blocking ads just for the sake of blocking ads.

> Neat software, but I think this is less defensible than other ad blockers.

Why is the onus on me to defend what software I run on hardware I own?

Re: Adblock Radio: An adblocker for live radio streams and podcasts

#120
post #100

Neat software, but I think this is less defensible than other ad blockers. With web ad blockers you protect against tracking, privacy violations and potentially malware and thus don't see "unacceptable ads". In contrast this seems to be about blocking ads just for the sake of blocking ads.

I block ads because I don't want to be conditioned to buy things I don't need or legitimately want. I don't want the mega rich to gradually chip away at my mind day by day, hour by hour in order to make themselves another fat pile of cash. If a site shows me some sad puppy image about me stealing their money by blocking their brainwashing, I just add their whole site to my filter. Content on the internet powered by a…

That’s nice. Do you use gmail and other services? Because those were built and delivered for free based on the same ideas you dislike.
Post reply on HN