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

Adfree Cities

adfreecities.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 278 posts

Re: Adfree Cities

#91

Post by maxwell »

andrewfromx wrote: post #48
Aerbil313 wrote: post #10

Ban all ads. All of them, they all are junk info our brains are not designed to handle.

free speech in the USA prevents this. What do you define as "ad". Can I talk to the person behind me in line at starbucks and tell them how I feel about the new iphone? Am I advertising to them? What if I work for apple? Can I wear a tshirt that says "iphone are great!" Ban that??

Content bans are unconstitutional, blanket bans on visual pollution are not, as in Vermont, Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, and Austin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_v._Town_of_Gilbert

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Austin_v._Reagan_Natio...

Re: Adfree Cities

#92

Post by 0xEF »

throwup238 wrote: post #50
tylervigen wrote: post #6

I have personally gotten very aggressive at removing as many ads from my life as I can. I pay for the "premium" version of everything I can to remove ads (Spotify, YouTube, podcast subscriptions) and use adblocker aggressively. It's so much nicer than the alternative. There are two places where ads remain: 1) Social media where the ads are integrated and not blocked (Facebook, YouTube in-video promos) 2) Billboards i…

> But I cannot think of a single time I have ever made any purchase based on any billboard. I would love if more municipalities clamped down on these. In California the billboards are now predominantly cannabis and casinos.

In Michigan, it's cannabis or personal injury lawyers, which is pretty on brand for us.

I wonder if you can tell what a whole state is about just by looking at the billboards.

Re: Adfree Cities

#93

Post by citified »

legitster wrote: post #69

I'll be the contrarian here and say that I actually like certain advertisements and billboards. If you are stuck in traffic or on a bus in an ugly urban hellscape, is a billboard really that bad? I'm sorry, they are not going to plant trees in Times Square to replace the billboards. Even in their own press photos, they are showing several billboards that are covering up even uglier buildings! Maybe you are an enlight…

I agree that ads on ugly 10-lane highways don't really detract from anything, but this is not the case with the cities this organisation deals with. They are mostly historic, pedestrianised cities in England where (especially digital) advertising would be of serious detriment to the surroundings, which is what is being campaigned against here.

Re: Adfree Cities

#94

Post by hot_gril »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #9

The fact that you can advertise in cities is the reason that big tech doesn't capture 100% of profits in every single market. Advertising in cities, from billboards to flyers to stickers is the only way to reach people directly, without going through an intermediary big tech monopoly. I have a sense that the people most likely to support this thing also whine a lot about big tech, so this is just another bullet point…

Exaggerated (it's not 100%) but partially true. If I'm specifically driving on a highway or through a town, I only have two options to find businesses: billboards or Google Maps. Plenty of times on a road trip, I've seen a sign for a diner I like and headed over there.

Re: Adfree Cities

#95

Post by bobthepanda »

bluGill wrote: post #84
digging wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that you can advertise in cities is the reason that big tech doesn't capture 100% of profits in every single market. I really don't think this is true. What evidence leads you to believe that? > Advertising in cities, from billboards to flyers to stickers is the only way to reach people directly Most billboards are from [inter]national corporations. Local businesses usually rely on the most effective form…

While the billboard may be an international corporation, they target local business. Most billboards I see in rural areas are for local businesses targeting travelers with things they probably need anyway - gas, hotels, and restaurants at the next exit. In cities there is a different mix.

At least in the US many of these are franchised businesses, so it is still corporations (Hilton, Best Western, McDonald’s etc.)

Re: Adfree Cities

#96

Post by [deleted] »

docdeek wrote: post #4

The award of the contract for the outdoor advertising space (bus shelters, roadside space) in my city was tied to providing and maintaining a cheap metro-area wide bike sharing scheme. For 30ish euros a year I get unlimited 45 minute trips on bikes that are widely available, well maintained, and easy to use. In 2022 there were more than 10 million trips taken on these hire bikes and nearly 84,000 annual subscribers.…

[deleted]

Re: Adfree Cities

#97

Post by mikepurvis »

Tempest1981 wrote: post #43
tylervigen wrote: post #6

I have personally gotten very aggressive at removing as many ads from my life as I can. I pay for the "premium" version of everything I can to remove ads (Spotify, YouTube, podcast subscriptions) and use adblocker aggressively. It's so much nicer than the alternative. There are two places where ads remain: 1) Social media where the ads are integrated and not blocked (Facebook, YouTube in-video promos) 2) Billboards i…

Do you watch any sports on TV? The amount of ads packed into an NBA basketball game on TV is startling and exhausting: - each player's jersey - arena walls - courtside walls (tv screens) - projected onto the court floor (updated each minute) - on the side and top of the backboard - most TV graphics ("Taco Bell play of the game") - split-screen ads during free-throws - traditional commercials during time-outs

My mind immediately went to the feasibility of using an AI artist to remove most or all of this in real time. Could be an interesting shift in terms of the "live" experience being significantly worse/degraded relative to the broadcast version with all that stuff painted out.

Re: Adfree Cities

#98

Post by everdrive »

Adfree is the only thing I'll currently tolerate. I tried out the Spotify client back on linux when the company was really new. If I turned the volume off while it played an advertisement, it actually paused the ad until I turned the volume back up.

One strike and they're out. Spotify has been banned in my household ever since.

Re: Adfree Cities

#99

Post by nonrandomstring »

I kinda like how they do it in Finland. Companies can have a smallish logos on their buildings. Most of Helsinki is unspoiled by garish boards except a few in the obvious shopping area around Kamppi.

Re: Adfree Cities

#100

Post by celestialcheese »

Espressosaurus wrote: post #54
docdeek wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ad space exists and the city owns all the ad space. They either get in the business of pricing it and selling it themselves, or they contract that business out. In this case, a condition of the contract was you have to pay for the bike scheme.

So the possibility that the space remains ad-free doesn't exist? Everything is a choice, we don't HAVE to accept these shitty ads everywhere.

> So the possibility that the space remains ad-free doesn't exist?

It does exist, but then the cost of the bike sharing would have be borne by

a) users of the bike system - this would impact ridership and equity of access. b) local govt - budget would have to come from somewhere.

considering b) would likely mean that the project wouldn't get past planning, really a) is the only alternative.

Everything is a tradeoff.

From my perspective, I'll take shitty ads if the money earned from those ads is spent on significant quality of life improvements. Same reason I support legalization and taxation of gambling, drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, etc where the revenues pay for schools, social services, etc.

Post reply on HN