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

461–470 of 633 posts

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

#461

Post by whiplash451 »

blackhaz wrote: post #15
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…

But they do. You have to mentally process the incoming data first, then discard it. It's a waste of attention, especially with mind-catching ads you can't figure out immediately. Sometimes they are as blocking as browser pop-ups, e.g.: logotypes (or even full ads) displayed before a responsive UI is shown to you, duty-free zones in the airports, and so on. I am pretty sure we will soon have real-life targeted billboa…

They definitely do. Ads in the subway carry an outstanding cognitive load. A simple experiment helps understand this: just walk through a super ad-heavy subway (Paris or London) then through a much lighter one (Vienna). The difference is significant. The mental experiment is literally different.

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

#462

Post by black_puppydog »

n0n0n4t0r wrote: post #35

I live in the area of Grenoble, a french city leaded by ecologists than banned ads several years ago (since 2014 if I'm correct). This is a pleasure, or, more precisely, I feel overwhelmed when I exit my city and am surrounded by so many ads! https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/20141124-fr...

Came here to write this. Grenoble rocks :)

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

#463

Post by whiplash451 »

throwawayboise wrote: post #418
ouid wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ad blocking would absolutely be a thing still. Fundamentally an ad blocker is just a filter on what portions of web page get loaded. It is my intention to increase the signal to noise ratio on the things I experience, so I would filter these things out myself at the brain level. I'm just automating the process and offloading it to the browser, and there will always be strong incentive to automate things.

If ads were just gifs or pngs that loaded from the same site, did not noticably impact page load times, and were displayed alongside the main content (analagous to ads in a magazine) I would likely not bother blocking them (and blocking would be more difficult: how would the blocking software know that they were ads and not part of the main content of the page?) I block ads when they do things like take over focus, a…

In fact, most ad blockers do just that: they filter out all ads but the ok-looking ones that fits a non-invasive standard.

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

#464

Post by drorco »

b3morales wrote: post #393
drorco wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It brings up an interesting question. I live in Israel where there are constant conflicts about what is OK to be shown in public, especially between the religious and non-religious. In Jerusalem for example, some ultra-orthodox often vandalize any kind of poster that shows a woman in it. They just tear-out/spray over the women on the poster. Some are ridiculous cases where they defaced a poster of an old woman who su…

Can we make a distinction between postings for different purposes, though? For example, commercial, political, and public education. Do a Coca-cola billboard, a sign advocating a piece of legislation, and a poster about the local library all get the exact same level of deference?

Yes. There are laws in some countries for example that make the advertising of Tobacco illegal. That's a form of censorship people can say is reasonable, but it can also be a slippery slope towards harsher censorship around other things people might find harmful - the female body, sugar, gambling, abortion, meat, etc.

The question is if you want to give the government such a broad spectrum to censor, in which they'd start judging whether or not a product might be deemed potentially harmful.

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

#465

Post by trompetenaccoun »

whiplash451 wrote: post #461
blackhaz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they do. You have to mentally process the incoming data first, then discard it. It's a waste of attention, especially with mind-catching ads you can't figure out immediately. Sometimes they are as blocking as browser pop-ups, e.g.: logotypes (or even full ads) displayed before a responsive UI is shown to you, duty-free zones in the airports, and so on. I am pretty sure we will soon have real-life targeted billboa…

They definitely do. Ads in the subway carry an outstanding cognitive load. A simple experiment helps understand this: just walk through a super ad-heavy subway (Paris or London) then through a much lighter one (Vienna). The difference is significant. The mental experiment is literally different.

The only reason ads exist is to reprogram our brains and make us want things we didn't previously want. It's brainwashing. People who say ads in public spaces do not bother them might be easier influenced than they understand. I often hear people say ads don't work on them but we're all susceptible to being manipulated.

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

#466

Post by trompetenaccoun »

niij wrote: post #215
goodcanadian wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The state of Hawaii also bans most ads and billboards (they are considered to take away from the natural beauty, which, of course, is a big tourism draw). I find it odd that there is even much debate about it and that most places do not have laws like this: https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol10_ch0436-0474/...

I agree they're generally ugly. But I assume most places don't ban them due to freedom of speech and private property considerations.

How are ads freedom of speech though? Unless it's the old "corporations are people" again.

I invite any CEO to personally walk around my city with a banner of their choosing. Being allowed to spend millions of dollars to make kids addicted to smoking and drinking isn't free speech, it's legalized crime.

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

#467

Post by IcyClAyMptHe »

Nextgrid wrote: post #146
qybaz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that the sites wouldn't exist at all if it wasn't for the ad networks they use to feed their editors, it seems justifiable to me!

I have zero problems with ad-supported shit going out of business and making space for good, paid content. Imagine a world where content has to be so good as to convince people to take out their wallet. No more clickbait, "this video is sponsored by ShitVPN", chumboxes, etc.

Fully with you on that one. The fact of the matter is that most "free" content is fast food style content - you eat it because it's designed to be addictive. Consumers may feel like they want it, but that's just because it's there, prodding you, calling out to you, autoplaying the next video out of "convenience". If it were to disappear tomorrow, I'd likely spend more time reading old books, practicing programming for my entertainment

There was a time when the likes of YouTube and blogging were just a hobby, not a job for pseudo marketers. Replacing paid "influencers" and "content creators" with plain hobbyists again would be a wonderful thing.

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

#468

Post by qybaz »

shakow wrote: post #407
Aerroon wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the regulators attacked more websites it wouldn't matter. You'd just have more and more websites that block European users. You can't expect websites to give you a pop up that asks whether they can monetize your visit or not. Everyone's going to click "refuse" because ads are annoying. As a consequence your website makes no money. At that point why run the website at all? Regulators don't want to regulate too…

> As a consequence your website makes no money. At that point why run the website at all? Many European websites are now proposing users to either accept cookies or buy a subscription to the website. This looks like a very sane way to address the problem to me. > You'd just have more and more websites that block European users. Why should I care? Market changes, adapt or disappear.

>Why should I care? Market changes, adapt or disappear.

This is not the market changing, it's a law crushing a free market that already existed.

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

#469

Post by TAKEMYMONEY »

makecheck wrote: post #370

One of the worst examples is we (still) have PLANES flying with banners behind them in California. They make noise, pollute the air, and assault your eyes when you could be looking at a beautiful blue sky without them. And I don’t know why it’s OK to “rent” this “space” to advertisers because, unlike something like a billboard, it’s not like someone went to the trouble of erecting a sky board with limited ad space.

NYC was plagued by floating, glowing LED billboards in the Hudson River for a while. Something out of Blade Runner.

https://ny.curbed.com/2019/10/9/20906159/ballyhoo-media-floa...

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

#470

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

blackhaz wrote: post #15
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…

But they do. You have to mentally process the incoming data first, then discard it. It's a waste of attention, especially with mind-catching ads you can't figure out immediately. Sometimes they are as blocking as browser pop-ups, e.g.: logotypes (or even full ads) displayed before a responsive UI is shown to you, duty-free zones in the airports, and so on. I am pretty sure we will soon have real-life targeted billboa…

Everybody draws the line somewhere else, but I hope you agree that "stealing your attention" is different from requiring an active action to be able to continue onward towards whatever task you were trying to accomplish (even if you might consider both unacceptable).
Post reply on HN