Why I Work on Ads • Hacker News Board

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#601

Post by bnralt » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:00 PM UTC

nyczomg wrote: post #559

DogOnTheWeb wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a position on a better alternative business model, or do you feel that a service like YouTube shouldn't exist? It seems to me that YouTube and many of the ad-supported services out there provide broad benefits to people, and I am swayed by OPs point that a regressively priced business model which restricts these benefits to the global rich is a greater disservice.

I disagree completely with the author's point that the ad model is not regressive. The author points out correctly that charging everyone some $ is regressive, because for some people that amount of money is a lot, and for others that is a little. Totally makes sense. Then, we go on to ads. Ads charge everyone a similar amount of bandwidth, attention, etc. But you know what? Some people who have more resources or kno…

> The costs are more abstract than when paying in actual dollars

Keep in mind people are still paying in actual dollars. Companies spend money on advertisement because they want something in return, and that comes from the people being targeted from the ads. I wouldn't be surprised if the poor end up paying much more than the rich in the end. It might even be more regressive than a subscription model.

Also worth noting that their are other negative externalities as well. Health for example - the poor tend to have a much worse diet that leads to bad health conditions, and there's likely a large connection between this and the advertisements for unhealthy products.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#602

Post by Kranar » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:03 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #598

This whole post assumes the only options which can conceivably exist for monetising content are: (1) ads, or (2) paying for single pageviews (and (3) doing it for free). Obviously this is a fallacy: there are numerous alternative ways to do things.

The article states the two options:

Paywalls vs. ads.

Now it's not that those are the only two conceivable options, it's that those are the only two options that are reasonably successful at scale.

I'm sure you could think up a donation system, or do something similar to what the Brave browser does, but those do not scale. Of course if you have some alternative approaches that work and produce viable business models, it would be great to hear them.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#603

Post by robbrown451 » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

beloch wrote: post #357

The crux of his justification for what he does is that, he argues, people wouldn't want to pay a monthly fee for services like youtube bundled with complete respect for their privacy. First, users do not currently have that choice. Sure, you can pay for some things (e.g. youtube premium), but it does nothing for your privacy. If you buy youtube premium you'll very likely see more ads for youtube premium (if you're no…

"First, users do not currently have that choice. Sure, you can pay for some things (e.g. youtube premium), but it does nothing for your privacy. If you buy youtube premium you'll very likely see more ads for youtube premium (if you're not already blocking ads)."

This doesn't make sense. I mean, you might see ads for YouTube premium on other sites, but you aren't seeing them on YouTube. You're paying to remove ads on YouTube, not the whole web. (Nor does it prevent people from stalking you IRL)

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#604

Post by npunt » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

hermesfeet wrote: post #571

Thanks for laying out your logic. I work in the ads business at FB. I do so because I personally like ads and my biggest gripe is that ads are not relevant and personalized enough. I want better ads. Ultimately ads support a robust ecosystem of free software and content that keeps many creators going. Consumers can also choose to buy their software and content, or donate, but most don’t. Despite their whining, most p…

Ads pit platform owners against their users because their incentives drive platforms to employ addictive designs that prey on psychological weakness to maximize user time on site. This is the fundamental misalignment that drives a lot of downstream effects.

On the other hand, a fixed fee would cap the incentive to push the upper bounds of user time on site, thereby respecting users time and inherent interest in whatever platforms offer, absent addictive designs that try to alter that inherent interest.

Features that nag you to invite people into groups, add non-friends via PYMK, push low quality notifications to reengage, show you outrage-inducing content, push you to constantly engage or share private details of your life, check out related groups and drive you deeper down rabbit holes, etc wouldn’t have the same oxygen if the fixed fee model was used. And a service to chat with and find out what your friends were up to wouldn’t be costly at scale; likely pennies per month [1].

I appreciate your thoughtful comment and the logic you’ve laid out but disagree. I believe we’ve settled on a lucrative, low friction, easy to implement incentive model with ads but it is far far from the ideal model with way too many negative externalities.

Note this only goes for ad models with unlimited appetite for user time. I wouldn’t have a problem with ad models that have an upper bounds, eg 5 ad impressions a day max.

[1] see: WhatsApp $1/yr model prior to FB acquisition

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#605

Post by andrepd » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

Kranar wrote: post #602

andrepd wrote: post #598

This whole post assumes the only options which can conceivably exist for monetising content are: (1) ads, or (2) paying for single pageviews (and (3) doing it for free). Obviously this is a fallacy: there are numerous alternative ways to do things.

The article states the two options: Paywalls vs. ads. Now it's not that those are the only two conceivable options, it's that those are the only two options that are reasonably successful at scale. I'm sure you could think up a donation system, or do something similar to what the Brave browser does, but those do not scale. Of course if you have some alternative approaches that work and produce viable business models,…

What do you mean by "scale" in this context? I fail to see how, having not tried alternative approaches, you conclude that they do not "scale".

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#606

Post by klelatti » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #501

thrwaeasddsaf wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Point being it really seems like people have decided/agreed that they prefer the ad model to anything else. I'm not sure how you mean this but what you say comes dangerously close to implying that people want ads. That may be true if you force them into a false dichotomy (pay or have ads). I think it's more just that people don't want to pay. If it's on the web, they read it for free, period. If it's not on the web…

I think you're missing that content creators (whether they be small or large) need to be able to subsist off of their work. This is especially true if we want high quality content. So the dichotomy is only false if you assume people are willing to accept "stop consuming content" which, by and large, they aren't.

How many content creators are fully supported by ads? All the material I read says that is probably the worst way of trying to earn a living as a content creator.

Seems to me that creators are getting a dreadful deal from the current set up and that FB etc are the ones gaining massively.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#607

Post by 8note » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:06 PM UTC

kingsuper20 wrote: post #61

The online ad business generally mystifies me. While an awful lot of the internet, especially the surveillance advertising part, looks to be the greatest misallocation of engineering (and other) talent in the history of the world, ya gotta ask about the efficacy. The only reasonably accurate targeting I've ever run into is the occasional ad for something I just browsed on Amazon. I've never clicked on an internet ad.…

I get the sense that it's mostly children and right wing PACs that keep the ad business afloat

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#608

Post by knorker » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:13 PM UTC

> the basic problem that some people have much more disposable income than others

That's the basic problem? We tried communism. It doesn't work.

> And so: ads. Funding the open web.

Or to put it another way: Ads waste human life and productivity.

If you waste 10 seconds of Elon Musk's time, yes actually the world just lost more than if you waste 10 seconds of my time.

And if you let me pay $1 instead of wasting my time, then I can spend that time being productive for more than $1, adding more to the collective value of the world.

Wasting everyone's time equally is actually hurting everyone, because it means taking away the positive-sum value produced by exchange of values.

I'm not saying inequality isn't a problem, but man, you say that ANY difference in equality of disposable income is a PROBLEM? That's just a race to the bottom of caring or doing anything at all for other people.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#609

Post by bnralt » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:13 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #501

thrwaeasddsaf wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Point being it really seems like people have decided/agreed that they prefer the ad model to anything else. I'm not sure how you mean this but what you say comes dangerously close to implying that people want ads. That may be true if you force them into a false dichotomy (pay or have ads). I think it's more just that people don't want to pay. If it's on the web, they read it for free, period. If it's not on the web…

I think you're missing that content creators (whether they be small or large) need to be able to subsist off of their work. This is especially true if we want high quality content. So the dichotomy is only false if you assume people are willing to accept "stop consuming content" which, by and large, they aren't.

The best content I get these days are from people who create content for free (hobbyists with personal sites, discussions on web forums, ad free podcasts, etc.). Getting rid of ads would make this content a lot easier to find, as it would get rid of all the SEO spam that clutters up the internet at the moment.

Re: Why I Work on Ads

#610

Post by TchoBeer » Thu, May 06, 2021, 10:15 PM UTC

justinboogaard wrote: post #514

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…

You (me, all of us) are (indirectly) paying for Google ads in the same way that we are (indirectly) paying for merchant credit card processing fees. If you paid for search, some businesses might be able to lower the cost of their products because they don’t have to pay for advertising.

Companies wouldn't stop paying for advertisement if we banned internet advertising, they'd have to spend more in other advertisement spaces and now those spaces aren't funding the search which we'd have to pay for.