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

Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

ninjasandrobots.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#81

Post by Kesty »

rglullis wrote: post #11

I really, really don't buy the idea that I should feel bad for using adblock. The whole "ads can be a way to provide quality services, and adblock removes that revenue" is the marketer's equivalent to the {MP|RI}AA's "every pirate is a stolen sale". The whole thing with the Internet is about desintermediation, and marketing departments are nothing but middle-men between producers and consumers. Even worse that they a…

Working on a company where 80% of our revenue is because of advertising I disagree.

There are two main difference between the RIAA "every pirate is a stolen sale" and adblock.

1)When you "pirate" something it doesn't mean that you "pirate" everything, while if you install adblock you block the ads on every site.

2)When you "pirate" something it doesn't mean that what you have pirated would have been a legal purchase. But if you go to a website you would have gone there with or without ads. You can say that you won't have clicked on the ad or won't have purhcased anything. But almost 99% of our ads revenue is on impressions and not on click or conversion, so it doesn't really matter if you click or convert the ad.

But, right know, the number of people that use adblock are not that big of a deal (at least on our niche market) that you have to work on fighting it because, right know (for us), it is not worth it.

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#82

Post by Digit-Al »

Last year I visited a site to do with laser eye surgery. I was then subjected to ads for laser eye surgery for 3 or 4 months, even after I had surgery and was definitely not going to be buying the service again.

This gave me an idea for how to prank a friend if they leave you alone with their computer for a short while. Just visit loads of sites for an embarrassing subject (maybe haemorrhoids, vaginal rash, penis enlargement, etc...) They will then be subjected to ads for that subject for months after, with no idea why :-)

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#83

Post by klez »

tomkarlo wrote: post #32
joejohnson wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That argument is false for a few reasons. With many online services, who's to say precisely what the product is. Aren't we (the users) the real product for a lot of large, free services (gmail, Facebook, etc.)? And for the bandwidth, I'm paying for that too. I pay an ISP every month to browser the internet. Shouldn't I be able to control what I use this bandwidth for? When I click on a link, I don't truly know what r…

I don't disagree that as a consumer you should have the right to choose what gets sent to you - but generally, if you're using a site, you're also consenting to its terms of service (which generally include accepting its ads.) As such, the product IS actually defined for you, and not up for you to define as you see fit. Using it outside of those terms is theft of service. If you don't want accept those ads, fine, but…

It's like telling me I can't change channels during commercials when watching tv or listening to the radio. This doesn't seem reasonable.

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#84

Post by klez »

earl wrote: post #79
rglullis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I addressed this in another comment. I have zero tolerance for ads, no matter how "un-intrusive" they are. Also, it is a matter of signaling: I don't want to reward sites that have a business model reliant on ads. That would give them a very strong incentive to go to the lowest common denominator and just optimize all their work to increase page views. Ten years ago, we used to complain about the state of "mainstream…

Dude, were you arsed to see what Ars offers for their $5/month? Because IN GIANT BOLD TYPE, they offer -- and I'm quoting -- "Ad free, premier page layouts." http://arstechnica.com/subscriptions/ So, to summarize: (1) You don't want to "reward" sites that have a business model reliant on ads (2) you want their content anyway (3) when they offer you a trade: pay us $5 and we won't show you ads, you ignore them Conclus…

This is a ransom, not a business model...

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#86

Post by floomp »

throw_away wrote: post #69
dubya wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's technically possible for sites to not serve content to those who use adblock. I remember arstechnica.com did this once to make a point. I guess if this was widespread, it would turn into an arms race though.

I'm pretty sure that washingtonpost.com does this now. This URL, for example: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-us-governments-ou... serves content if you have adblock plus turned off, but a registration page if you have it turned on.

I have ABP and could view the article for a few times, then I tried again and I got the registration page. Disabling ABP didn't change that. I have a feeling it's based on how many times you've viewed their site rather than ad blockers.

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#87

Post by rglullis »

earl wrote: post #79
rglullis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I addressed this in another comment. I have zero tolerance for ads, no matter how "un-intrusive" they are. Also, it is a matter of signaling: I don't want to reward sites that have a business model reliant on ads. That would give them a very strong incentive to go to the lowest common denominator and just optimize all their work to increase page views. Ten years ago, we used to complain about the state of "mainstream…

Dude, were you arsed to see what Ars offers for their $5/month? Because IN GIANT BOLD TYPE, they offer -- and I'm quoting -- "Ad free, premier page layouts." http://arstechnica.com/subscriptions/ So, to summarize: (1) You don't want to "reward" sites that have a business model reliant on ads (2) you want their content anyway (3) when they offer you a trade: pay us $5 and we won't show you ads, you ignore them Conclus…

We both looked at the same page. But what is the point of "premier page layouts" if my preferred means of consumption is the RSS feed?

Full-text RSS is the only thing that would interest me, but not $5/month worth of interest.

Conclusion: yo mama is fat.

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#88

Post by acdha »

rglullis wrote: post #87
earl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, were you arsed to see what Ars offers for their $5/month? Because IN GIANT BOLD TYPE, they offer -- and I'm quoting -- "Ad free, premier page layouts." http://arstechnica.com/subscriptions/ So, to summarize: (1) You don't want to "reward" sites that have a business model reliant on ads (2) you want their content anyway (3) when they offer you a trade: pay us $5 and we won't show you ads, you ignore them Conclus…

We both looked at the same page. But what is the point of "premier page layouts" if my preferred means of consumption is the RSS feed? Full-text RSS is the only thing that would interest me, but not $5/month worth of interest. Conclusion: yo mama is fat.

Conclusion: you don't actually intend to pay anything but somehow think freeloading should be respected. Quality content doesn't come for free: if you valued Ars' content either unobtrusive ads or $5/month are good options for ensuring that they'll be there next year.

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#89

Post by acdha »

klez wrote: post #84
earl wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, were you arsed to see what Ars offers for their $5/month? Because IN GIANT BOLD TYPE, they offer -- and I'm quoting -- "Ad free, premier page layouts." http://arstechnica.com/subscriptions/ So, to summarize: (1) You don't want to "reward" sites that have a business model reliant on ads (2) you want their content anyway (3) when they offer you a trade: pay us $5 and we won't show you ads, you ignore them Conclus…

This is a ransom, not a business model...

Ransom would be if Ars editors stormed your house and forced you to watch their ads. Business models don't get much more textbook than offering free and premium versions.

Re: Google, I've had enough. How about a Compromise?

#90

Post by beeneto »

earl wrote: post #79
rglullis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I addressed this in another comment. I have zero tolerance for ads, no matter how "un-intrusive" they are. Also, it is a matter of signaling: I don't want to reward sites that have a business model reliant on ads. That would give them a very strong incentive to go to the lowest common denominator and just optimize all their work to increase page views. Ten years ago, we used to complain about the state of "mainstream…

Dude, were you arsed to see what Ars offers for their $5/month? Because IN GIANT BOLD TYPE, they offer -- and I'm quoting -- "Ad free, premier page layouts." http://arstechnica.com/subscriptions/ So, to summarize: (1) You don't want to "reward" sites that have a business model reliant on ads (2) you want their content anyway (3) when they offer you a trade: pay us $5 and we won't show you ads, you ignore them Conclus…

Please read this http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
Post reply on HN