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

The correct amount of ads is zero

manuelmoreale.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 611 posts

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#181

Post by arrowsmith »

tossandthrow wrote: post #132
Aerroon wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You will just get other kinds of advertisement. Ads that are technically not ads. Things like product placements, free promotions, word of mouth campaigns etc.

These are ads and in many jurisdictions Also treated like ads. Weird that This is not the case in the US?

If you grew up in Europe, I promise that when you visit the US for the first time, you will be SHOCKED by America's advertising standards (or lack of them.)

Advertising is everywhere, everywhere, everywhere, everywhere, to an extent far beyond what you're used to from home. Posters, billboards, fliers, TV commercials, product placement, celebrity endorsements - you can barely step outside without being bombarded by yet another obnoxious advertisement. And "obnoxious" is an understatement: American adverts are noticeably more loud, garish, cheesy, repetitive and attention-grabbing.

It's really quite something. And it's exhausting.

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#182

Post by bhargav »

This is one of those things where interests of the consumer are at odds with that of the business. Businesses need money, customers have money. Customers do not always want to pay the businesses directly. This issue is more obvious when it comes to news media. We don't have a good solution to pay $0.01 - $0.10 or whatever small denomination. The other question is would we even want to?

I don’t think Freemium or whatever subscription model solves these problems beyond the scope of a single website. I am interested to hear how this can be solved for consumers for whole swaths of websites that have ads.

It’s pretty easy to say ads are evi, but I personally don’t know a good solution.

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#183

Post by manuelmoreale »

renewiltord wrote: post #69

Personally, I think the correct amount of subscription fee is zero and ads should be zero too. It’s unethical to charge for information you have that could improve someone else’s life. It’s near zero marginal cost to give it to them and you’re just going to hoard it? We should ban paying for information at the federal level to prevent this horrific practice.

And journalists and the people running the news sites are going to be paid with what? With thoughts and prayers?

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#184

Post by immibis »

bhargav wrote: post #182

This is one of those things where interests of the consumer are at odds with that of the business. Businesses need money, customers have money. Customers do not always want to pay the businesses directly. This issue is more obvious when it comes to news media. We don't have a good solution to pay $0.01 - $0.10 or whatever small denomination. The other question is would we even want to? I don’t think Freemium or whate…

I subscribe to YouTube Premium (from back when it was called YouTube Red). I pay a fixed amount each month, and that gets given to people who made videos I watch. Why can't we have more things like this?

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#185

Post by executesorder66 »

mgraczyk wrote: post #148

[flagged]

> You're complaining that a product is offering you something, and you don't like the offer?

No, the complaint is about the "offering" in the first place. People don't want your shit forced in front of them. The fact that you are incapable of realizing this on your own is hilarious.

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#186

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

miki123211 wrote: post #153
0xEF wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, the market gives permission to the offense. The funny part is we should have all learned our lesson from the cable television days. Perhaps it's been long enough that everyone forgot, or maybe most of the market is just too young now, but there was a time in the US when cable television was ad-free. Commercials started sneaking into that with some regularity even though part of the draw to paying for cable tv…

From my (admittedly non-US) experience, people actually get pretty annoyed when they have to watch a long movie or TV show without commercial breaks, especially when there's no "pause" feature available. Not so much of a problem on modern TVs / set top boxes, as they usually offer that feature (though things get complicated if you want to do some channel flipping to e.g. quickly check how a sports game is going), but…

Also non-US, but I never remember this being a problem - the immersion breaking outweighed the lack of a built-in pause every time. But VHS also launched very early in my life and completely eliminated any upsides to ads, as well as many of the downsides!

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#187

Post by gosub100 »

9o1d wrote: post #116
renegat0x0 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some YouTubers scream in panic that you dare to install ad blocker. Well nobody told them to build their business around such ad-driven solution. There are thousands, and thousand of useful places, each for free. Take a look at awesome lists at github. These provide so much value to the society. It does not require any subscriptions, nor money. There are millions of people who share education, and knowledge for free.…

Did you know that YouTube does not make a profit, but only covers its own expenses? What if it becomes unprofitable because of ad blockers? What will remain? Paid cinemas? Do you want to pay money from your own pocket? And you will remember the times when you could pay by watching ads without money. Think about it! No one will do anything for you for free. Try to take a taxi or a train without money? Try to steal bre…

Why do you stop at looking at ads? Why not compelling viewers to actually support the advertisement by buying their stuff? Letting them pay your way through life without buying their products is tantamount to stealing. All this free money from ads, do you get free money from the grocery store? From a taxi driver? No. So why do you take it from advertisers without buying whatever they offer?

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#188

Post by npteljes »

altairprime wrote: post #83

I don’t get why advertisers still advertise. I select brands either by nearest retail box store or by dedicated research into comparative qualities. I don’t watch or listen to any advertising-supported video or audio media. I don’t use personalized or targeted promotion codes. I don’t ever knowingly click on banner/interstitial ads of any kind. Am I still in the minority or has my behavior become more prevalent? (Not…

Yes, minority. Marketing works, and it works on multiple levels as well, serving multiple, synergistic purposes. An ad for a product serves to increase sales of that particular product, which is what most people think ads are for. But in the meantime, the brand also positions itself, by showing that product as their representative, with the experience that comes from its choice of colors, shapes and other presentation material, by showing their logo and other associations like a jingle, and by signaling values that the viewer is supposed to associate with the brand. All of these are happening at the same time, and with every tactic that is not directly illegal - and it works. People's lives, culture is shaped by products, it's impossible to avoid at least thinking a bit about Apple, Coca Cola, or cars for example.

So even if we are in the minority of trying to be as rational with the purchases as possible, we surely don't do this all the time with everything. And surely we can't expect others to follow suit - so, simplifications will be made in the decision process, and that is exactly where advertisers are aiming for, and successfully.

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#189

Post by beeforpork »

Ads make people desire stuff that they don't need. The goal is to make you unhappy. It is the opposite of help, the opposite of happiness.

Ads are also a great enforcer of gender and sexual identification by stereotyping and categorizing in order to target audiences. Hairstyle, toys, tools, colour, food, behaviour, everything. I blame ads for identification crises of countless souls, and for toxic human environments and for hate as people internalize stereotypes and categories. We need less enforcement to identify. We need more 'it does not matter'.

Yes, the correct amount of ads is zero.

Re: The correct amount of ads is zero

#190

Post by eqmvii »

immibis wrote: post #184
bhargav wrote: post #182

This is one of those things where interests of the consumer are at odds with that of the business. Businesses need money, customers have money. Customers do not always want to pay the businesses directly. This issue is more obvious when it comes to news media. We don't have a good solution to pay $0.01 - $0.10 or whatever small denomination. The other question is would we even want to? I don’t think Freemium or whate…

I subscribe to YouTube Premium (from back when it was called YouTube Red). I pay a fixed amount each month, and that gets given to people who made videos I watch. Why can't we have more things like this?

ostensibly because after years of experiments, ads get more revenue in most circumstances.
Post reply on HN