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

Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

elezea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 126 posts

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#41

Post by edw519 »

edw519's simple rules for reading on the internet:

That's a Back Button

(to the cadence of "That's a Paddlin'" from "The Simpsons")

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFgR0m-9FmM

  Login button below the fold? That's a back button.
  Animated ads? That's a back button.
  Shifting content? That's a back button.
  More than 2 pages? That's a back button.
  Need to be logged in to Facebook. That's a back button. 
  Unexpected video? That's a back button.
  Unexpected sound? That's a back button.
  Overlapping ads & text in my browser? That's a back button.
  Overlapping ads & text at 800 x 600? That's a back button.
  No horizontal scroll bar to get beyond right fold? That's a back button.
  Flash? That's a back button.
  pdf? That's a back button.
  Slideshow? Oooh, you better believe that's a back button.
  Freezes my computer? That's a battery removal.
It's a wonder I find anything readable any more.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#42

Post by JoeAltmaier »

prawn wrote: post #36
paulnelligan wrote: post #33

I would argue that once you dismiss ads and scroll down the page that content is entirely readable. The internet has given us an expectation that everything should be free and immediate, and we can't tolerate anything less. In the old days you paid for a newspaper or magazine with money, now you pay for it with advertising (or you pay money to remove the advertising) - nothing new there, nothing surprising, good cont…

You pay for a newspaper and it still has advertising...

...but my newspaper ads are a wad of color-printed coupon sheets etc. I extract the ad-wad and drop it in the bin on the way out of the market.

Leaving me with 3 or 4 thin sheets of local news.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#43

Post by farslan »

prawn wrote: post #36
paulnelligan wrote: post #33

I would argue that once you dismiss ads and scroll down the page that content is entirely readable. The internet has given us an expectation that everything should be free and immediate, and we can't tolerate anything less. In the old days you paid for a newspaper or magazine with money, now you pay for it with advertising (or you pay money to remove the advertising) - nothing new there, nothing surprising, good cont…

You pay for a newspaper and it still has advertising...

One example for this is the The New Yorker iPad app. Great content, built-in subscription, but even with those they have full-page ads. Marco also mentioned about this: http://www.marco.org/2011/10/27/double-dipping-ads-in-ipad-m...

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#44

Post by MatthewPhillips »

brigade wrote: post #14
tallanvor wrote: post #12

Well, which would we prefer? Seeing the ads, or having to pay for access to each site? Personally, as annoying as ads are, I still prefer them being there to the content not being available at all.

The issue is not the existence of advertising. The issue is (primarily for me) the new wave of popup ads that don't let you view the content until you find the 30x30 pixel close area. And secondly the sites where ads have become more important than content (reflected in the design.) And thirdly the dozen social media buttons on every single page. Non-horrid advertising should be possible for any respectable website.…

I think your underestimating the effectiveness of evasive advertising.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#45

Post by artmageddon »

prawn wrote: post #36
paulnelligan wrote: post #33

I would argue that once you dismiss ads and scroll down the page that content is entirely readable. The internet has given us an expectation that everything should be free and immediate, and we can't tolerate anything less. In the old days you paid for a newspaper or magazine with money, now you pay for it with advertising (or you pay money to remove the advertising) - nothing new there, nothing surprising, good cont…

You pay for a newspaper and it still has advertising...

Yes, but the advertisements don't get in the way of the content - editors wouldn't allow that. Also, the only way the ads can harm you is if they're coated with cocaine or some other drug :)

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#46

Post by EwanToo »

m_eiman wrote: post #18
EwanToo wrote: post #4

The future of reading on the web is easy to change, all we need to do is pay some money for each article we want to read without adverts... Unfortunately, the primary impact of putting up a paywall for premium content seems to be to raise huge arguments about why "information wants to be free", not the reality of what happens without one.

I'm still hoping that something like Flattr can work. It should be possible to have a middle ground between "everything is ad supported" and "everything requires subscriptions or credit cards", especially for niche "small" content (that don't take months or years to produce) where the audience can appreciate the work done and its value.

I hope Flattr or one of the others like it can work, but I think the habits of people who are now used to things being free, and who aren't likely to en-mass start voluntarily "tipping" authors, will be hard to change.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#47

Post by efsavage »

citricsquid wrote: post #8
iaskwhy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Is it because The Deck is selective? Because if that's the reason then there you have a problem to be fixed by another startup. Bloggers of the world, unite? (I know there are already a couple of offerings and people working on new ad networks.)

That is exactly why it can't be considered a good option and why it is "bad" for the wider internet. The Deck being selective is saying "we know adverts suck, so if you're actually good you can be in our super neat actually good system!" so instead of solving the problem of bad adverts, they're just ignoring it and saying that the sites they like can be in their small network that doesn't have the problem. Their enti…

I still don't see the problem here. They're a small, selective network, with relevant ads that don't need to be intrustive to add value. I think the author is saying that more of these are part of the solution, as they can tune ads to the members of the network, based on actual feedback rather than engaging in a shouting match decided by 10-figure analytics.

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#48

Post by bambax »

edw519 wrote: post #41

edw519's simple rules for reading on the internet: That's a Back Button (to the cadence of "That's a Paddlin'" from "The Simpsons") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFgR0m-9FmM Login button below the fold? That's a back button. Animated ads? That's a back button. Shifting content? That's a back button. More than 2 pages? That's a back button. Need to be logged in to Facebook. That's a back button. Unexpected video? Tha…

> More than 2 pages? That's a back button.

Well, that should be a "Read Later" button (or, at the very least, looking for a "Print" button).

Re: Please let this not be the future of reading on the web

#50

Post by tincholio »

bambax wrote: post #48
edw519 wrote: post #41

edw519's simple rules for reading on the internet: That's a Back Button (to the cadence of "That's a Paddlin'" from "The Simpsons") http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFgR0m-9FmM Login button below the fold? That's a back button. Animated ads? That's a back button. Shifting content? That's a back button. More than 2 pages? That's a back button. Need to be logged in to Facebook. That's a back button. Unexpected video? Tha…

> More than 2 pages? That's a back button. Well, that should be a "Read Later" button (or, at the very least, looking for a "Print" button).

I think he referred to the forced pagination for increased ad prints, not the actual length of the article (although of course sometimes the "printer friendly" view solves this, in which case looking for the "Print" button can be helpful).
Post reply on HN