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

Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

lichess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 211 posts

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#171

Post by thomasahle »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #118
thomasahle wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it matter whether it's automatic?

Because if you have to manually notice, recognize, then look away, then arguably you've already paid with your attention. If someone or something is doing it for you (and others) automatically then it eliminates the 'payment' and undermines producers ability to produce.

> If someone or something is doing it for you (and others) automatically then it eliminates the 'payment' and undermines producers ability to produce.

Doesn't it also undermine producers ability to produce if you just get really good at quickly looking away?

It seems from your argument the "case could be made" that it's at least a little unethical to not spend at least a little while paying attention to each ad when reading a newspaper.

Like there's some scale where the left side has "0 attention spent, 0 ethical" and the right side has "maximum attention spent, maximally ethical".

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#172

Post by stepupmakeup »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #6

Lichess is so fucking cool. It's easily one of my top inspirations for building a company "right." My favorite part of Lichess is their open financials. Check it out: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Si3PMUJGR9KrpE5lngSk... If you want to know the exact amount to donate to offset your gameplay - you can actually do that.

Question from someone who has zero knowledge about managing infrastructure: is all of that absolutely necessary? Only one is marked "we can afford to lose", but $228/mo for a monitoring server seems extremely excessive. Even $44 for "private communcations" (I'm assuming something like RocketChat) surely have cheaper alternatives?

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#173

Post by greedo »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #167
greedo wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can think of plenty of new entrants in the last two decades: HiSense TCL Vizio BenQ Vizio has a 17% gross margin. Just because they mismanage their money doesn't mean I have to put up with their sob stories about not making $$.

Gross margin is not relevant here, profit margin is. Benq is qisda, and it is a very established ODM/OEM. They have a measly profit margin of 3%. But they also sell a lot of other electronics than just TVs. Hisense has been selling TVs since the 1980s, and has a 6% profit margin, although I don’t know how trustworthy the Chinese financial figures are. But they also sell a lot of other non TV items. TCL is relatively…

I think that LG, Sony and Samsung are doing fine making TVs, perhaps for the lower end, the influx of cheaper sets is pressuring profit margins for this segment.

And gross margin is very relevant. Vizio is spending a lot of money either on general expenses, debt, administrative expenses etc. If you compare LG Display to Vizio, Vizio is spending 2x on Selling General and Administrative expenses. If they matched LG, that's an additional $130M in annual profits.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#174

Post by lotsofpulp »

greedo wrote: post #173
lotsofpulp wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gross margin is not relevant here, profit margin is. Benq is qisda, and it is a very established ODM/OEM. They have a measly profit margin of 3%. But they also sell a lot of other electronics than just TVs. Hisense has been selling TVs since the 1980s, and has a 6% profit margin, although I don’t know how trustworthy the Chinese financial figures are. But they also sell a lot of other non TV items. TCL is relatively…

I think that LG, Sony and Samsung are doing fine making TVs, perhaps for the lower end, the influx of cheaper sets is pressuring profit margins for this segment. And gross margin is very relevant. Vizio is spending a lot of money either on general expenses, debt, administrative expenses etc. If you compare LG Display to Vizio, Vizio is spending 2x on Selling General and Administrative expenses. If they matched LG, th…

Why would it be profits? LG display loses money every year.

https://www.lgdisplay.com/eng/company/investment/finance

How do you know which expenses outside of gross profit are necessary and not necessary? You don’t, so all you can do is look at net income / profit margin trends across many years for many businesses. If they are all low, then that means there is not much juice to squeeze.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#175

Post by matheusmoreira »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #164
matheusmoreira wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ads are displayed on my machines. Using the processor cycles and RAM of my computers. Powered by my electricity. Consuming my limited attention span. Injecting information I didn't ask for and do not want to remember into my mind.

So avoid sites with ads?

No.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#176

Post by paulryanrogers »

Etheryte wrote: post #149
paulryanrogers wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visiting sites consume resources. If you walk into a store and take a gift card you're still consuming resources meant to be paid for, even if they're mostly digital resources. Regardless of the car or shoes you used to do it. I don't welcome a world of paid products that also include ads. Yet ads do make some paid products cheaper, like say a Kindle or a TV. Folks blocking ads from a premium product probably have a…

This is misguided. Just like visiting a site consumes resources on their server, visiting a site consumes resources on my system, in fact, if I don't block ads it consumes even more resources. In many cases I would argue that fetching and rendering the whole flashing shebang of ad garbage some sites ship these days consumes considerably more resources than simply serving the files on a server.

Seeing billboards and print ads consume brain cycles. Walking into a store takes energy, even stealing some prepaid cards consumes calories. That they require you do some effort doesn't mean it's ethical to consume their resources without exchanging a bit more.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#177

Post by paulryanrogers »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #175
paulryanrogers wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So avoid sites with ads?

No.

Why not? Do you prefer they keep making the ads worse to compensate? Or they paywall more? Or make the ads 'native' and indistinguishable from useful content?

People don't want to work for you for free.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#178

Post by paulryanrogers »

thomasahle wrote: post #171
paulryanrogers wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if you have to manually notice, recognize, then look away, then arguably you've already paid with your attention. If someone or something is doing it for you (and others) automatically then it eliminates the 'payment' and undermines producers ability to produce.

> If someone or something is doing it for you (and others) automatically then it eliminates the 'payment' and undermines producers ability to produce. Doesn't it also undermine producers ability to produce if you just get really good at quickly looking away? It seems from your argument the "case could be made" that it's at least a little unethical to not spend at least a little while paying attention to each ad when…

Fair point. I think advertisers understand people will learn to gloss over and mentally filter yet the impression is still something. And in aggregate that's enough. I don't think anyone expects people to feel like consumers must give their full, undivided attention, with eyelids taped open and hands bound.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#179

Post by paulryanrogers »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #159
paulryanrogers wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we collectively boycotted the sites that allow such garbage then they would serve less obtrusive ads. To consume the content without even considering ads makes it unethical.

Nothing at all unethical about it. We're not obligated to spend even one second looking at ads. They sent us free stuff hoping we were going to notice the ads they bundled alongside it. We're not obligated to do that though. It's that simple.

You're not ethical for consuming while also automatically bypassing even the possibility of an ad impression. It's the impression that pays for the content. No impressions. No content.

Re: Lichess: Block Ads and Trackers

#180

Post by paulryanrogers »

Tao3300 wrote: post #168
paulryanrogers wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accusing people with different opinions of being less than human (or out of touch with humanity) only harms and does not help your argument.

Easy now. It's not like I did anything mean like accuse you of being in ad sales. Also, kettle, you're the one telling people they're behaving unethically.

I don't know how commentors behave. I'm just making the case that taking without paying is unethical, and ad blocking is exactly that.

If the very thought or argument makes people uncomfortable, even when they disagree, that is not my responsibility.

Post reply on HN