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

201–210 of 856 posts

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

#201

Post by Nasrudith »

washadjeffmad wrote: post #190
timmg wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Flip side: Why doesn't YouTube pay users for the work they perform on their platform, re- impressions, interactions, training? The more often and "better" someone interacts with their services, the more "free minutes" without ads they earn. If someone is a big producer of value, they earn access to tiered UHD/4K/8K or "premium" content, or they're cut a check / given credits. YoutTube is making money, somehow, off of…

Good lord, no. "Excess value" is a frankly pants-on-head stupid notion that should have died in the 19th century. It assumes businesses should operate with not only zero profit but zero margin for expenses or growth. It is beyond stupid and I find it unbelievable that there are so many followers who really should know better on several level.

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

#202

Post by doctorpangloss »

garciasn wrote: post #192
AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

This is EXACTLY what cable companies predicted would happen when we went a la carte. They were using their monopoly power to drive down the overall price of packaged TV and by de-bundling, we end up paying more overall. For once they were correct and I apologize for questioning it 15 years ago. That said, I am ok with SOME advertisements to keep the web running. There are two big problems with this: 1. Market investo…

> They were using their monopoly power to drive down the overall price of packaged TV and by de-bundling, we end up paying more overall.

This is complicated. Piracy sold Comcast broadband Internet connections for many. Napster long predates Comcast's acquisition of NBCUniversal, when it became a content maker.

So even in the last two decades, looking at one company, it played some, or all, sides of the producer ecosystem, in complex ways, sometimes 200% changing (sticking a minus sign in front of) how it benefits from consumer trends. If you want to analyze any specific thing about cable TV pricing, you're going to need to write a whole dissertation about it. Meanwhile "whatever the consumer is willing to bear" will get you most of the way there.

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

#203

Post by nonameiguess »

AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

I can't agree that it costs more. I'm a pretty profligate spender and just subscribe to everything even though I don't actually watch that much television. So right now, my household is subscribed to YouTube Premium, Peacock, Paramount+, Disney+, Max, Apple TV+, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, and Curiosity Stream. I'm honestly not even sure what it costs, but guessing somewhere in the arena of $10 a month or so on average, since some are more, some are less. That's $100. The last time I was subscribed to premium cable with at least HBO, Showtime, and ESPN, it was $180 a month. In 2011 dollars. That was also linear, not on-demand, so quite a bit worse service. We had to pay extra for a DVR that could record stuff and I don't even remember how much extra that was.

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

#204

Post by seydor »

Online ad spending keeps increasing every year, so it can't be dying

https://www.insiderintelligence.com/topics/storage/02a371186...

It's just that google + fb are increasingly keeping bigger and bigger piece of the pie for themselves, which among others enriches their workers to the detrimment of content creators. Monopoly is to blame here, not a natural death

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

#205

Post by JumpCrisscross »

makeitdouble wrote: post #25
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…

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.

Total ad spending is growing slower than the economy [1].

[1] https://www.ibisworld.com/us/bed/total-advertising-expenditu...

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

#206

Post by rconti »

garciasn wrote: post #192
AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

This is EXACTLY what cable companies predicted would happen when we went a la carte. They were using their monopoly power to drive down the overall price of packaged TV and by de-bundling, we end up paying more overall. For once they were correct and I apologize for questioning it 15 years ago. That said, I am ok with SOME advertisements to keep the web running. There are two big problems with this: 1. Market investo…

A significant number of the streaming services people complain about paying for offer services that cable companies never did.

Plus, I can choose which streaming services I want, and how long I want to pay for them. And everything is on-demand. And there are no ads (except on YTTV).

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

#207

Post by jeroenhd »

standardUser wrote: post #20

I'm not going to watch this entire video. I just want to ask, what the fuck is going on with those disgusting body horror ads we see all over the internet? Close ups of pimples and wounds and bizzare diagrams of human anatomy that all appear designed specifically to draw the eye (at any cost) but personally just repulse me. There's a whole cross section of websites I won't visit, including some major news sites, beca…

These companies want clicks and views. They used to lure you in with curiosity, then with distracting colours and animations, and now with other emotions. Outrage ads and disgust ads get clicks. Any strong emotion that will get your eye drawn to their crap is worth exploiting.

They're also experts at using psychological warfare like well-positioned faces and expressions to trick your eyes into looking at their general area. That's why every clickbait thumbnail has some form of a face with an extreme expression in it.

Adblockers are the only solution. Whether you go with uBlock or AdNauseam, the only way to make this stuff go away is to make their business model unviable.

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

#208

Post by yomlica8 »

rebeccaskinner wrote: post #103
pentagrama wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that the new cheaper ad based Netflix tier was really successful. So maybe a future of all paid products but a cheaper option for a worst experience with ads?

Unfortunately, ad revenue is a poisoned well. Even if you are paying for the ad-free tier, you will be limited to content that was developed with a mind toward advertisements. Once you serve any ads, everything is under pressure to be optimized for ads. Even if you don't mind the changes to the content, there's a constant pressure driving up costs and driving down convenience to continue avoiding ads. If you're payin…

I'm sure they sell your usage data even if you pay to opt out of ads as well so it isn't like you've even completely escaped by paying to start with.

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

#209

Post by garciasn »

alistairSH wrote: post #198
garciasn wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is EXACTLY what cable companies predicted would happen when we went a la carte. They were using their monopoly power to drive down the overall price of packaged TV and by de-bundling, we end up paying more overall. For once they were correct and I apologize for questioning it 15 years ago. That said, I am ok with SOME advertisements to keep the web running. There are two big problems with this: 1. Market investo…

we end up paying more overall A basic Fios TV package is $75/month today. Most streaming services are around $20-$30/month and allow month-to-month plans. You can fairly easily rotate among 4-5 services, using 2-3 at a time, to keep costs lower than with traditional cable. This works pretty well if you have non-specific TV interests. Where they really get you is with sports - that market is super fragmented and getti…

FIOS is only available in limited areas of 9 states. It's not exactly widely available and should not be used as evidence to the contrary of this. If we're using anecdotal evidence, the only Internet I have available to me at my summer home is $110/month 25/2 DSL, without TV.

That said, you are spot on, because we are no longer tied into long contracts you can absolutely swap in and out. The problem is that they carry primarily self-created content which, IMO, is far less attractive than what the main networks were able to push out previously which further degrades the usefulness of the a la carte model.

Post reply on HN