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

Why I Work on Ads

jefftk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 882 posts

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#231

Post by savanaly »

k__ wrote: post #163

"I give half of what I earn to the most effective charities I can find, and the more I earn the more I can give." It makes me sick to read this garbage. This charity bullshit is what too many rich people hide behind to rationalize the crap they do to humanity. Bezos and Gates destroyed so much good on their way up, they will never be able to buy themselves out with charity. Same goes for the author of that article. I…

Being a good person isn't about summing the good and bad parts of your life. Good deeds can't erase bad ones, but they also aren't invalidated by them. Be thankful for whatever good someone does and also demand apology, restitution, and the promise to do better for the bad that they do.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#232

Post by cblconfederate »

"ads are good" is a red herring. i don't object to ads, but i find google's chokehold on the ad market abhorrent, becuase it becomes excusionary, both for publishers and advertisers. Google is thus able to impose e.g. moral codes on what is allowed to be advertised and what content is allowed to be monetized. The solution is indeed micropayments and they exist, like brave.

Another drawback of the ad-supported model is that it has created a very pervasive culture of unaccountability. Google has terrible user support because they truly don't care about users - they 'll keep making money regardless of what their users think and there's no way for users to vote with their feet (practically -- after all google gatekeeps all their address bars).

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#233

Post by jefftk »

luxpir wrote: post #85

I wonder if something like the radio/royalty model wouldn't work as a replacement for ads. You pay ISP, they are the "radio station" playing what you want to hear, they pay micropayments to all the sites you visited proportionally. I can immediately see significant issues (user data, managing payments, admin, biggest sites get bigger etc.) but if there's a market demand for a new model, it wouldn't even have to be re…

It is common for people to only have one option for a fast ISP. I would be scared about a world in which monopoly ISPs had that kind of power.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#234

Post by vim1234 »

I think what HN community is missing is that tech jobs can allow you to pay for all these services if possible, but most of the world especially the developing world, is not capable of paying for the content. If everything was behind paywalls, internet would be for the rich guys who can afford paying for these services. To make it free and equal for all, ads are the necessarily evil, according to me.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#235

Post by savanaly »

sweetheart wrote: post #207
k__ wrote: post #163

"I give half of what I earn to the most effective charities I can find, and the more I earn the more I can give." It makes me sick to read this garbage. This charity bullshit is what too many rich people hide behind to rationalize the crap they do to humanity. Bezos and Gates destroyed so much good on their way up, they will never be able to buy themselves out with charity. Same goes for the author of that article. I…

Do you actually think this is garbage and bullshit, or do you think that maybe you're feeling a little insecure that someone is donating a _lot_ of money to good causes, and you're comparing yourself to them? Genuinely not saying you are, but it's a very common subconscious reaction, and definitely worth investigating. When we see someone who appears to be taking the moral high road (however you define it), we feel t…

Yeah I find myself asking why is this person indescribably angry about someone working in ads and then donating hundreds of thousands to charity when there are tens (hundreds? across the world?) of thousands of folks out there working in ads donating zilch. It's an emotional response not a logical one to get mad at the OP like that.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#236

Post by jjj1232 »

cm2012 wrote: post #150
omginternets wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The author jefftk is getting unfairly downvoted maybe because cynics just see it as a version of, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." I don't think that's why people are downvoting. Speaking for myself, it's because his analysis focuses only on the benefits of ads, and conveniently ignores the actual ethical problems ( e.g. large-scale collect…

I've never seen any evidence of anyone hurt by the large scale collection of personal data by Google and FB.

My Instagram ads seem to be laser-focused on my insecurities. I don’t buy the shit they’re selling by they definitely make me feel bad about myself, so mission half accomplished!

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#238

Post by oulipo »

jasode wrote: post #29

The author jefftk is getting unfairly downvoted maybe because cynics just see it as a version of, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." I will offer a contrarian opinion as a user whose salary does not depend on advertising: the advertising model for using Google search and watching Youtube videos works better for me as a consumer . The alternati…

The problem is that ads are not free. It's paid. And it's paid by you.

When you say "I'm using Google for free because it's supported by ads", what it means is:

- some companies are buying (expensive) ads on Google

- they are therefore increasing their marketing budget

- which mechanically increases the price of their services and products

- which you ultimately have to pay

so no, the "free ads" are not free for the consumers, you pay them as a "marketing tax" on each product and service that you pay for

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#239

Post by noir_lord »

jjj1232 wrote: post #223
elliekelly wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the "ads are useful" argument frustratingly disingenuous. It's a transparent and deliberate attempt to move the discussion away from what people actually take issue with in modern internet advertising - tracking and data collection - and instead tries to frame it as something far more benign. The ads. Aren't. The problem. The stalking is. Ads can be useful. But no one is saying they aren't! So why is it consta…

The stalking is the problem, but the ads are too. Ads have been a problem well before tracking was a thing. Since at least the 1920s (I’m thinking of Edward Bernays but there are probably earlier examples) the goal of advertising is to manipulate consumers into making irrational decisions. The majority of ads make us feel inadequate to get us to buy something, like the only the thing that will make us whole is a new…

> The majority of ads make us feel inadequate to get us to buy something

I know it's hard to disprove but I don't think adverts have that effect on me, partially it's because I don't see many adverts and partly because that kind of blatant manipulation is so hilariously blatant.

I acknowledge that someone might be running a really effective advertising campaign on me but since I basically don't buy anything I don't actually need I can't imagine what that would be.

Post reply on HN