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

You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

bearbin.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 633 posts

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#241

Post by DarylZero »

technothrasher wrote: post #66
jcun4128 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard some gas stations have ads on the pump display

These pumps with “Gas Station TV” are so annoying that I go out of my way to get my gas at a different station. I’ve wondered if it actively drives other customers away too or if I’m just very sensitive to it.

Yep, me too. A new gas station was beng built and I drove by it many times. When I noticed it opened, I got gas there, and they had ads on the pump! Shocking at the time. I decided never to go there again.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#242

Post by DarylZero »

blackhaz wrote: post #234
DarylZero wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can I just paint over it, or rip it apart? That's what Banksy does and says "yes" to. > No, that would be vandalism. So what? That's just a word. > As much as I hate ads, THEY have re-arranged the world by paying for it in a free market, and we must respect that. LOL, but why "must we"? You have no reasoning, no justification.

It's not just a word, it's a law, from UK's Criminal Damage Act 1971: "A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence." But whether we should change that law is probably an off-topic here. All I am saying is that we mus…

What does it mean to say "we must respect the law"? Banksy demonstrates that this is not true. You only need to avoid law enforcement.

It seems to me, of course I have no way of knowing, but it SEEMS to me that you are NOT EVEN AWARE that you're not making arguments.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#243

Post by timbit42 »

IvanK_net wrote: post #168
supermatt wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats a pretty disingenuous comparison. You aren't just charging your users "ad views". You are also facilitating 3rd parties tracking their online behaviour, and they certainly aren't agreeing to those terms when they first land on your site.

Could you be more specific? What "3rd parties" are tracking what "behaviour" of yours, and why exactly is it worth so much? And what do you mean by "you" in "tracking you"? Do they know your name?

The behaviour is what websites you visit. It is worth money because websites have topics which hints how they can better target advertising at you. Yes, they know our names because they can track us across every website we visit.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#244

Post by IvanK_net »

detaro wrote: post #226
IvanK_net wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you know how the web works, you must know, that websites do not have access to your device. You do not tell Photopea your name or your address. The only thing a website can know, is, that "someone with a screen resolution of 1920x1080 pixels visited www.Photopea.com at 18:37". It can be useful to know the number of visitors, or the usual screen resolutions.

> Google, Facebook, Amazon, Ad Lightning, Setupad, UniConsent, Adagio, ID5, Criteo, Magnite, RTB House, Casale Media, EMX Digital, Adform, Pubmatic, Between Digital, Lijit Networks, AppNexus, 33Across, Adx Premium, Sharethrough, Smart Adserver, OpenX, BRealTime, bumlam.com (couldn't find information about owner of this domain), BidSwitch, Getintent, Which one of those do you need to know usual screen resolutions of u…

I do not know a lot about the ad mechanism, which my partners use. But it usually works by contacting several servers and asking them "hey, there is someone visiting www.Photopea.com, probably from Canada, with a screen resolution of 1920x1080 pixels, how much would you pay for showing them your ad?" ... there is an auction, and the ad from the highest bidder is shown to you. The more servers take part in the auction, the more money I can make.

Like really, if you open a website for the first time in your life, what kind of secret information could it know about you?

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#245

Post by greggman3 »

jjulius wrote: post #233
323 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you called that artist a "vandal". Would you also call Bansky a "vandal"? Some people find unapproved grafitti objectionable. How do you feel about that?

So I'm not trying to defend Banksy specifically here... >So you called that artist a "vandal". Would you also call Bansky a "vandal"? He can be both, "vandal" and "artist" aren't mutually exclusive. >Some people find unapproved grafitti objectionable. How do you feel about that? I'm not answering for the person you're responding to, but for me, I'd say I feel fine about that. There are people who find nudity in art o…

Objecting to unapproved grafitti is not about "is it art". it's about property destruction. If you disagree then I'll be happy to come over to your house and paint whatever "I want" on your house, your car, and TV, your computer, your sofa. If you'd be upset that I painted your stuff then you agree with the people who see it as property destruction. If you'd be upset for your own stuff but not when that stuff belongs to someone else then you're just being hypocritical.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#246

Post by DarylZero »

marklubi wrote: post #232
berkes wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why is Coca Cola allowed to promote their proven harmful sugar juices in that space, but am I not allowed to oppose that promotion in the same space? What is allowed and tolerated in that public space is skewed, an unfair. Certainly not balanced.

> Then why is Coca Cola allowed to promote their proven harmful sugar juices in that space, but am I not allowed to oppose that promotion in the same space? You are certainly allowed to. Pony up for the ad space if you want to promote the opposite, or advertise something else entirely.

This is war, ain't no rules. No such thing as "allowed."

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#247

Post by jjulius »

kdmccormick wrote: post #193
323 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of times people who loudly yell "fuck the system" are also quietly using the system when it suits them, that's my point. Bansky is no "dismantle the capitalism" hero or whatever pedestal people have him on.

I hear you; the copyright case especially shows that he is no paragon of anti-capitalism. But I think it's worth maintaining that (1) some things are worse than other things and (2) motive matters and (3) imperfect people can still make good points. I have never, ever felt like a piece of Banksy's art, or any original piece of visual artwork for that matter, is being shoved down my throat. They're quiet, static, rela…

>I hear you; the copyright case especially shows that he is no paragon of anti-capitalism.

Does it, though? The linked TMZ article suggests the lawsuit was filed by the Los Angeles DA on behalf of the property owner whose property lost value because of the defacement. It doesn't appear that Banksy himself is involved in the lawsuit.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#248

Post by aww_dang »

There's an important distinction between prohibiting speech or commerce you dislike and refusing to consume or participate in what you dislike.

If the equivalent augmented reality technology were developed, I'm unsure of what grounds objections would stand on. If someone wants to go about with video goggles which replace billboards with waterfalls or wildflowers, go for it. Develop the technology and release it.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#249

Post by DarylZero »

notreallyserio wrote: post #203
pessimizer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * At multiple points in the McDonald's self-order touchscreen kiosk flow. And they've only added (most of) these recently. What they've done for me is is increased the time it takes to check out by at least a third. They're paying for the ads with lengthened lines, which is a little shocking when talking about the automated option, because customers choose the automated option to save time. It might be a bad expect…

They probably did the math: they don't need the order taking machine to take less time than making the meal itself. If they made it so you could place an order in 1 second you'd still be in their store for a while. "Might as well bombard them with ads!"

They can even do A-B testing on the ads. Even if they lose some customers in line they can know they make more sales to compensate. Also they only really care about the 10% of customers who are totally addicted to the product and buy 90% of it. Those ones aren't leaving the line.

Re: You block ads in your browser, why not in your city?

#250

Post by Forge36 »

smarx007 wrote: post #7

But ads in real life do not prevent me from going on about my day. There is no analogy to interstitial pages with ads like in Forbes some time ago with the button Continue to your article: it would be infuriating if you had to view an ad before being able to use the subway ticketing system. You also don’t have ads on at the airport timetable screen. You don’t have pinkertons following you to learn your habits and sho…

My best friend is a former smoker. He's quit many times. The biggest struggle he has is when anti-smoking commercials show up, being reminded of smoking makes him want to smoke.

They don't prevent going about the day, they make going about your day more difficult.

Post reply on HN