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

Vietnam bans unskippable ads

saigoneer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 835 posts

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#91

Post by ksaj »

jason_s wrote: post #42

I just uninstalled a game from my mobile phone this morning that had heavy ad usage. It was interesting to note the different ad display strategies. From least to most annoying: - display a static ad, have the "x" to close appear soon (3-10 seconds) - display an animated ad, have the "x" to close appear soon (3-10 seconds) - display a static ad, have the "x" to close appear after 20-30 seconds - display an animated a…

Some "news" sites are so annoying about their ads, I just close the tab and google for someone else's version of the story. I block sites that show up in my news feed often but display more nag than content.

I'm sure in their mind, they don't care about me leaving. Apparently more than enough people put up with it to keep the site viable.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#92

Post by zeroonetwothree »

wrsh07 wrote: post #39
glimshe wrote: post #22

They shouldn't be surprised if ads are shown more often.

Yeah - it seems like this will cause a series of 5 second skippable ads that still sums up to >many seconds of unskippable ads (unless that's banned, in which case they will just see ads more often, as you say) I expect it will make the experience worse rather than better because the publishers will try to maintain their inventory (how many seconds of ads they show per minute watched)

You mean a regulation will cause unintended consequence? Color me shocked

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#93

Post by xoxxala »

datadrivenangel wrote: post #29

Requiring skip is good, but the part about focusing on illegal ads is better. If all ads were for soda, cars, and other legitimate products, that would be one thing, but so many ads are for straight up scams these days.

Considering how unhealthy soda is to consume, I'd ban those ads in a heartbeat right along side tobacco and alchohol. The UK just banned all TV and online junk food ads and I'm alright with that.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#94

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

vladms wrote: post #77
master-lincoln wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would have been a better world without ads. There would be more competition which would improve products and thus outcome for customers. Also most of the demand of goods is artificially created by ads, so there would be less production of crap and thus less resources wasted. It would also mean a whole industry of people would do something else that is potentially not as detrimental to society. The money sp…

While I agree that the world would be better without ads in their current form, we should think why are ads required and what are the benefits. The main issue is how you discover a new product. The main benefit to society is/could be faster progress. The main downside to society could be unhappy people that consume crap. I think smart people should think about alternative solutions, not just think "ads are the proble…

That's a great idea for a dystopian sci-fi story: you can opt out of ads, but your product choices are publicly broadcast instead.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#95

Post by add-sub-mul-div »

lifetimerubyist wrote: post #78

I always wondered about traditional television. People like my dad still have it. It still has a shitload of ads. They're unskippable. People don't really seam to care about those for some reason though.

A television commercial hasn't been unskippable since the advent of the DVR in 1999. If you do care about avoiding commercials, that's where you have the most power to avoid it. It's streaming where the service has full power to restrict control of navigation through the video stream.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#96

Post by somenameforme »

simplicio wrote: post #70
_jab wrote: post #13

I've often wondered whether the world would be better without ads. The incentive to create services (especially in social media) that strive to addict their users feels toxic to society. Often, it feels uncertain whether these services are providing actual value, and I suspect that whether a user would pay for a service in lieu of watching ads is incidentally a good barometer for whether real value is present. Don't…

Maybe, but on the otherside, ads make available a huge amount of media and services to people who would otherwise be unable to afford it. Like, I suspect a non-trivial percentage of people wouldn't have email if it weren't for gmail and other free w/ads services.

Most internet services are very low cost to offer for any company that has some infrastructure setup already. So for instance 'back in the day', before Google hoovered up everybody's email, what would typically happen is you would get an email address with your ISP.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#97

Post by wolvoleo »

al_borland wrote: post #90
iammjm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world would definitely be better without ads. All ads are poisonous. All of them first convince you that you and your life as it is is not good enough, and that in order to be happy again you need to spend money to buy a $product.

As much as I hate ads, I don’t know that it’s so simple. There are products that do solve legitimate problems people have. Maybe there is less of that now, but in this past this was very true, and advertising helped make people aware that solutions to their problems have been developed. The first washing machine, for example. The problem comes when the advertisement manufacturers problems that didn’t previously exist…

If a product is really that good than people will legit recommend it. It's not a problem at all.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#98

Post by miltonlost »

gip wrote: post #86

I'm just wondering why governments think it's a good idea to regulate ads. IMO that is something the market (e.g. the users) should take care of.

How, as a user, do I avoid getting ads shoved in front of my eyes on buses? on billboards? on subways? on tv channels? at movies? in my mail? in my email? in my search results? in my map app?

i'm just wondering what you want the "market" to do and how.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#99

Post by anthem2025 »

simplicio wrote: post #70
_jab wrote: post #13

I've often wondered whether the world would be better without ads. The incentive to create services (especially in social media) that strive to addict their users feels toxic to society. Often, it feels uncertain whether these services are providing actual value, and I suspect that whether a user would pay for a service in lieu of watching ads is incidentally a good barometer for whether real value is present. Don't…

Maybe, but on the otherside, ads make available a huge amount of media and services to people who would otherwise be unable to afford it. Like, I suspect a non-trivial percentage of people wouldn't have email if it weren't for gmail and other free w/ads services.

[dead]

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#100

Post by charlieyu1 »

iammjm wrote: post #24
_jab wrote: post #13

I've often wondered whether the world would be better without ads. The incentive to create services (especially in social media) that strive to addict their users feels toxic to society. Often, it feels uncertain whether these services are providing actual value, and I suspect that whether a user would pay for a service in lieu of watching ads is incidentally a good barometer for whether real value is present. Don't…

The world would definitely be better without ads. All ads are poisonous. All of them first convince you that you and your life as it is is not good enough, and that in order to be happy again you need to spend money to buy a $product.

As much as I hate ads, if you don’t make yourself known to potential customers you’re very screwed
Post reply on HN