181–190 of 428 posts
I remember in 2nd grade, a kid brought a note from his parent which was written in a few dozen tiny Post-It notes. The teacher was furious about the improperness of the format of the message. That just came to mind seeing yet another too-fucking-long Twitter thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine you're probably right. But I still don't understand - why not have a single Tweet, with a summary of a blog post running on your own domain? Wouldn't that make you even more internet famous?
All people will do is switch over to Medium.
Sure you could have ads pulled from your OWN website if you piss off an ad agency, but there are multiple ad agencies that exist. You can always switch providers.
When you go to a private company like Medium, anything you say will get you de-monetized, AND there's no other way to earn again. Some people face this situation and then create their own website to build back up their buzz, but why not start at that point initially?
I suspect this has something to do with the fact that the average 13-16 year old rarely opens their mobile web browser. To compete in 2021, you need an app. Something needs to change.
> Re: forced Chrome logins. Don't need cookies if you own the browser! ( https://twitter.com/fasterthanlime/status/145209451374118912... ) The swindle with FLOC was pretty obviously tied in this, but people still went in circles discussing whether it's private or not, and downvoting those who said FLOC is a trap. Let's consult the plan, nothing is even secret about this: - Google disables third-party cookies, crippli…
F Twitter threads. Seriously... just... stop. It's worth noting with all the revelations in the last couple of days, that at least some of them aren't new. For example: - "Jedi Blue: A Scandal That Highlights, Yet Again, The Need To Regulate Big Tech" (19 Jan 2021) [1] - "Facebook and Google allegedly cut a deal that reduced ad competition" (17 Jan 2021) [2] - "Google acknowledges it foresaw possibility of probe of '…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is far more likely that Google found the new site from telemetry from Chrome than it is a random bot, owned by Google scanned the site within seconds.
Google also runs their own public DNS servers which afaik Chrome defaults to. They can just sit server side waiting for DNS lookups of domains they've never seen before and queue them up for the Google bot. No browser telemetry needed.
Hello advertisers. You are being manipulated and abused just like the consumers you are targeting. There is very little evidence to show that invasive digital advertising is actually effective. When was the last time you clicked on one of these ads and actually made a purchase? Bad for consumers and bad for advertisers. Why continue with this opaque, profit sucking charade that mainly enriches those selling the ads?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are right - That’s another practice is morally dubious (And imo should be outlawed!) Where this gets tricky is when a business has a name along the lines of [city name] [generic product category]. If this was outlawed, a competitor to a business named Foo-town Yard Care would be effectively blocked from advertising on Google.
Can you get a trademark for Foo-town Yard Care?
Specific-word plus generic word(s) seems to be a good formula for trademarks.
$mycity lawn care would be just fine. But it would make it difficult to let’s others advertise for lawn care in $mycity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This kind of rhetoric is problematically naive. Advertising effectiveness is often vague, but it also works well in many circumstances. It takes a certain kind of hubris to suggest that all these companies spending $500B on advertising have no idea what they are doing, and that if only they listened to HN/Reddit they could save so much money and make the world a better place. The issue here is to what extent G has ma…
Please show evidence that Google's global privacy invading data collection network justifies their 3-4X premium in advertising cost over simple non-invasive alternatives. "Problematically naive" is assuming the cost is justified without any such evidence. Amazon's ad business is currently growing at a 70% annual rate by simply displaying ads based on search words --- probably because searching on their site is an ove…
It really isn't. You can (maybe) justify a 2X premium on th basis of higher ad effectiveness due to superior performance. The rest of that margin comes from having the largest (by far) marketplace, which forces more buyers to bid against each other (raising ad costs), and more sellers to undercut each other (lowering publishers' ad revenues), in order to participate.
F Twitter threads. Seriously... just... stop. It's worth noting with all the revelations in the last couple of days, that at least some of them aren't new. For example: - "Jedi Blue: A Scandal That Highlights, Yet Again, The Need To Regulate Big Tech" (19 Jan 2021) [1] - "Facebook and Google allegedly cut a deal that reduced ad competition" (17 Jan 2021) [2] - "Google acknowledges it foresaw possibility of probe of '…
It's quite simple why people do Twitter threads. It's all about the stats for themselves. Everyone wants to be internet famous
Using the median page load time is one of the best tools for analyzing effective load speedups. Sounds legit to me, and they're just trying to speak to the jury.