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

The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

tilvids.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 856 posts

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#141

Post by Phaedor »

andreygrehov wrote: post #133
Phaedor wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing he has done is push the paid replies to the top of every tweet. So now every tweet is full of low quality replies at the top and you have to scroll to find the higher quality ones below.

I don't personally agree with your observation, but setting that aside, would you consider that (pushing the paid replies to the top) the definition of "killing" Twitter?

I actually think it might. My experience is that the people who pay to get their replies to the top do it either because they have something to sell, or because they agree with Elon's politics. So the result is that every tweet I view have pretty much the same low quality answers on the top. That has made the experience much worse for me, and I personally would quit if there were a good enough alternative.

It also depends on how you define "killed". I dont think twitter will be gone, but there is a chance it will become a lot more similar to truth social or parler.

Do you think Hackernews would do better or worse if they introduced a paid tier that put your comment above others every time?

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#142

Post by ndriscoll »

jhaenchen wrote: post #99
gleenn wrote: post #5

His two examples are Twitter and Reddit whose ad revenue is dying because those two companies have made huge blunders. Elon seems to almost actively be killing Twitter (which the poster even states). Reddit screwed Apollo and then many of the most popular subreddits protested and did things like show porn on otherwise usually SFW content to prevent Reddit from showing ads and thus killing their profits. Those are big…

The real issue IMO is that users do not understand that ads pay for their apps. They don't want to see ads and the ads they do see they want them to be uninformed and general. They want everything free. This just encourages subscriptions. Which we're seeing become more and more common.

Most of the apps I use are in fact free, and do not have ads to pay for them. Someone wanted something to exist, so they made it, and then they gave it away for free to everyone because computers are magical and there's no marginal cost to do that. The ad based Internet dying would leave hobby and academic content, significantly cleaning up the signal:noise ratio on the web, which would be great. As a bonus, you wouldn't need to be Google to index it all if it weren't filled with AI generated SEOd blogspam garbage trying to make money from ads.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#143

Post by skydhash »

zer8k wrote: post #123
edmundsauto wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also a matter of equity. The instant the cost moves off of “free”, hundreds of millions of people are excluded. Each person has to evaluate their own costs and benefits, but services that don’t charge offer value to the most poor at an unbeatable price.

To be fair, there is a dramatic difference between the free you are talking about and the free that youtube, facebook, etc are. It's one thing to offer a small website or something for free. It's another thing to power a million, or even billion, dollar infrastructure and the supporting staff on charity. It's part of the reason I drew a parallel to OSS. The "free" it is isn't free in the charitable sense. It's free i…

> It's free in the sense, ideally, you should contribute something. In the case of ads - it's your eyes.

No, it's not. Either something is free or is not. Either I chose to pay or I don't. If it's not free and I choose to pay, I can enjoy the service. If I choose not to pay, they can refuse me. If it's free, and I pay (donate), good. If I decide not to pay, it's on you to bear the cost. I don't have any obligation to you.

It's not mandatory to read, watch and listen to ads. And most people choose not to, or they tune out, especially when it's not related in any way to their current activity.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#144

Post by Gigachad »

timmg wrote: post #112
Gigachad wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone understands that ads pay for sites. You can want something for free while still understanding how adverts work.

Honest question: how can you expect stuff for free without ads?

As a user that isn’t my problem. If a service is being given away for free, I will take advantage of that for as long as its available.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#145

Post by RandallFlagg »

jhaenchen wrote: post #99
gleenn wrote: post #5

His two examples are Twitter and Reddit whose ad revenue is dying because those two companies have made huge blunders. Elon seems to almost actively be killing Twitter (which the poster even states). Reddit screwed Apollo and then many of the most popular subreddits protested and did things like show porn on otherwise usually SFW content to prevent Reddit from showing ads and thus killing their profits. Those are big…

The real issue IMO is that users do not understand that ads pay for their apps. They don't want to see ads and the ads they do see they want them to be uninformed and general. They want everything free. This just encourages subscriptions. Which we're seeing become more and more common.

I would personally prefer to pay for a service with my money as opposed to my information and ads being shoved in my face. Unfortunately many services don't even give an option to pay with money, so I've been trying to find alternatives, for example I've been starting to migrate away from Gmail to Protonmail. I understand things cost money, so let me pay you for your services. I just despise ads with a passion.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#146

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #138
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That little animation at the end, was there a panel of her going to a gynecologist and a green mist coming from her? The older I get, the more I can see what Ayn Rand was getting at.

Please resist the urge to go that direction with it Genuinely, and I’m horrified of all of this, but it’s really something we can change, it’s not hopeless don’t give up humanity.

I don’t think Ayn Rand gave up on humanity at all. Just the worthless nonsense and the people endlessly consume it.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#147

Post by andreygrehov »

Phaedor wrote: post #141
andreygrehov wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't personally agree with your observation, but setting that aside, would you consider that (pushing the paid replies to the top) the definition of "killing" Twitter?

I actually think it might. My experience is that the people who pay to get their replies to the top do it either because they have something to sell, or because they agree with Elon's politics. So the result is that every tweet I view have pretty much the same low quality answers on the top. That has made the experience much worse for me, and I personally would quit if there were a good enough alternative. It also de…

> Do you think Hackernews would do better or worse if they introduced a paid tier that put your comment above others every time?

If a paid tier alone puts your comment above others, then the result is negative. However, I do not believe Twitter's algorithm simply ranks by the presence of a blue checkmark. It is a signal amongst other signals and not a sole criteria. My feed has improved after all the changes, which is why I could not share your observation.

Truth social exists because of a censorship. The idea of a social network with high censorship results in a state of content being a walled garden. While the intention behind censorship may be to create a safer and more controlled environment, it often comes at the cost of limiting diversity of thought, stifling creativity, and hindering the progress of society.

Censorship, when implemented excessively, can lead to a state where only certain viewpoints and information are allowed, effectively creating an echo chamber that reinforces existing beliefs and discourages critical thinking.

Twitter has the potential to become the next Truth Social. If Meta enforces excessive censorship in Threads, people might perceive it as a more "positive" social network, offering the illusion of a better alternative. With media support, people could gradually migrate towards Threads, leaving Twitter in decline. However, if Elon achieves his super-app goal, Twitter's current form will no longer exist, rendering these social media-related issues irrelevant. Consequently, Twitter and Threads would evolve into a completely distinct applications.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#148

Post by Izkata »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #80
_yb2s wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is horrifying

That little animation at the end, was there a panel of her going to a gynecologist and a green mist coming from her? The older I get, the more I can see what Ayn Rand was getting at.

I don't know what Ayn Rand thing you're referring to, but I'd be a lot more concerned about the beginning of the ad where she's poking holes in a condom...

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#149

Post by stephen_g »

makestuff wrote: post #56
makeitdouble wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What examples of ad based rising companies do you see ? My first thought was Google, and it's started to plateau in the recent years: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GOOGL/alphabet/rev... . Meta also took a dive, and while it was from a sharp turn of the business focus, I'd argue it comes from an attempt to avoid staying on a stagnating market.

Amazon has a growing ad business, but imo it seems more like a “listing fee” that is required to have any sales on their store.

Ah, perhaps this why almost the only time I buy things on Amazon I have usually found the listing through Google…

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#150

Post by zer8k »

skydhash wrote: post #143
zer8k wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, there is a dramatic difference between the free you are talking about and the free that youtube, facebook, etc are. It's one thing to offer a small website or something for free. It's another thing to power a million, or even billion, dollar infrastructure and the supporting staff on charity. It's part of the reason I drew a parallel to OSS. The "free" it is isn't free in the charitable sense. It's free i…

> It's free in the sense, ideally, you should contribute something. In the case of ads - it's your eyes. No, it's not. Either something is free or is not. Either I chose to pay or I don't. If it's not free and I choose to pay, I can enjoy the service. If I choose not to pay, they can refuse me. If it's free, and I pay (donate), good. If I decide not to pay, it's on you to bear the cost. I don't have any obligation to…

> If I decide not to pay, it's on you to bear the cost. I don't have any obligation to you.

That is not how the actual world functions. This sort of anarcho-primitivism does not lead itself to large scale, widely available, systems. In society you pay taxes for services you perceive as (locally) free. On the internet you pay with ads (at least for now).

You are correct that you can exploit a free service. In some services, the taker to giver (leecher/seeder, whatever ratio you prefer) is high enough that service can maintain equilibrium. This is largely not true for all but the most used services. Even food banks shut down because the seeder to leecher ratio is unsustainable. Nothing is stopping you from driving these services into the ground. And you will.

I really hate how smug your post comes off. Do you know what this absurd smugness gets us? A centralized internet owned by 4 companies that can afford the seeder/leecher ratio. The 4 companies that will come to own the internet also hate net neutrality. Buckle up...because then we all pay. Even Stallman encourages people to contribute back to things they use. When your attitude is so smug that not even Stallman, the king of smug nonsense, agrees with you...that says something.

Post reply on HN