Yes, yes. I agree with the author. More importantly though, that is one fine website he's running.
Appreciated <3
The correct amount of ads is zero
161–170 of 611 posts
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would pay for YouTube premium if you can afford it. The cost is pretty reasonable and 55% of the subscription goes to content creators. It's not a huge amount but probably similar to what a creator would make if ads were shown.
But it is not possible to use it without creating a Google account. I should not need to sign in to watch videos, especially when that makes all efforts at avoiding tracking null.
I get why you might not want to create a Google account, but how is it even possible to operate without one? I'm genuinely astonished by people who are able to get by in 2024 without having ever created an account on Google.
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are ads and in many jurisdictions Also treated like ads. Weird that This is not the case in the US?
They aren't all ads, because the situation gets really muddy. If a website talks about an upcoming movie is that an ad? What if they were shown the movie before its release?
It's an ad if and only if it is mixed into an article that is not about the movie. If I click a link that says that the article behind it is about the movie, it's not an ad. If I click on a link to a comparison of PC networking equipment, then it's an ad because a movie is not PC networking equipment.
This doesn't mean the movie article (or indeed the hardware comparison) can't be sponsored. It just means the ad shouldn't be able to be shoved in your face unsolicited.
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#164This is a bad take. Ads are not the problem. Behavioural ads with suriveillance and data economy is. Static ads or contextual ads are the answer. Some of the best examples I can think of on the top of my head is duckduckgo.com and https://daringfireball.net/feeds/sponsors/ Paywall doesn't stop data surveillance. All the news sites have become paywalled because ads revenue dried up because people installing ad blocker…
Ads are always bad. Poor or unemployed people get bombarded with lifestyle messages on a daily basis. That is psychologically damaging.
Stop pharmaceutical ads.
Stop NGOs and USAID from being able to buy ads on any issue.
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Defending this practice because it's the status quo is ludicrous. All of these things happen not because people approve of them, but because they have no choice. Every company in those industries is doing this because they want more profits. Companies do have the choice, but they would flood your eyeballs with ads 24/7 if it was socially acceptable. So they push that line as far as they can take it before people star…
You have plenty of choice to not visit a website
> Just go live in a shed in the woods
Websites that do not use ads cannot survive (on a large scale) if their competition uses ads.
Large consumer-facing websites are forced to use ads.
As long as ads are legal, consumers will not have the choice to use ad-free websites. (The only exceptions being startups operating at a loss.)
This is not even solved by websites allowing for paid, ad-free plans.
Who pays for Google? You, when you by a can of Coke. Coca Cola increases the price of the drink, then gives that extra money to Google.
If you are using a paid, ad-free plan, you are not only paying for the plan, you are also still paying the increased price of Coca Cola.
As long as ads are legal, people who use paid plans have to pay more* than twice of what the service is actually worth.
*Don't forget the effort that is being put into designing ads, building tracking technology, managing tracking data centers, which again, are paid by you, every time you buy anything.
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#166People (at least used to) pay for magazines and newspapers, which have also been partially supported by ads forever. Perhaps a more sustainable balance would be only first-party ads (ie no individualized tracking) for paying subscribers?
Yes. I also notice that ads in magazines and newspapers aren't nearly as annoying as ads on a screen, so I don't mind them as much.
newspaper and magazine ads didn't block the page for 1 minute before allowing you to read the headlines on the page, then repeat the process every time you turned the page.
they felt less intrusive because they were
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#167[flagged]
It used to be a smaller, brighter place without ads.
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#168Dear friends! I am a simple programmer. I had a website in 2009, where I posted useful articles. I had a small ad block, which allowed me to pay for my expenses. When users began to install ad blockers en masse, the number of ad views dropped significantly and I had to close the site. Now I have no job and I am very poor. I want to thank those people who not only do not want to pay for good service, but also install…
dear friend! I am also a simple programmer. When I post simple rants like the one featured here, not only it doesn't have an ad block anywhere and so it generates no money but you're also all consuming bandwidth on a server i'm paying for with my money.
I also have a job—as a self employed developer that earns absolutely not enough to live a decent life—and I still do what I can to respect the web and respect the people ho visit my site by not serving them ads or by tracking them.
Because I believe that respecting you and your privacy is more important than me earning a few $.
Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#169Re: The correct amount of ads is zero
#170Disagree. Would I like zero ads? Yes, do I think a company should be required to offer a zero ad service for money? No. If you don't like that they have ads even if you pay then don't use the service. People still subscribe to newspaper even though they are full of ads. They paid money, they got an ad full paper. People still subscribe to cable TV even though it's full of ads. People still buy magazines (paid for the…
Hard agree (with you, that is). It's just another case of people confusing "What I personally want" with "What actually leads to a sustainable business/ecosystem". I honestly think people get confused about this because we are so accustomed to getting what we want.
In economics, the phrase "what the market will bear " often comes up. Consumers will block obnoxious ads up to what companies will bear.