Vietnam bans unskippable ads • Hacker News Board

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#141

Post by oldjim798 » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:57 PM UTC

porcoda wrote: post #133

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.

Ad driven internet content is at least 25 years old, so it’s had time to settle into the equilibrium the market will converge to. The current state of things is precisely where the market drove it to, so it seems pretty clear that the “invisible hand” isn’t going to make it better and appears to favor making it worse. This seems like an obvious case where an external force is required to push the market in a directio…

Beyond the ad driven internet, ad driven content has been at least 150 years old. Ever seen a photo of a pre-WW1 baseball stadium? Or soccer stand? Covered in ads. Old newspapers are awash in ads. Day time TV soap operas are so named because they were sponsored by soap companies.

All a giant waste. Just propaganda blasted at our eyes and ears all day, a drum beat of distraction attacks on our attention. Almost all forms of advertising should be banned or regulated till they are as quiet and unobtrusive as possible.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#142

Post by simplicio » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:57 PM UTC

iso1631 wrote: post #115

simplicio wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If a company is willing to spend $5 to force you to watch an advert, then they are expecting more than $5 from you in return.

Sure, but a lot of that is 1) just influencing what type or brand you get of products your going to buy anyways, and 2) only an average, presumably wealthier consumers are "subsidizing" poorer ones, since they have more spending to be influenced.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#143

Post by barbazoo » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:58 PM UTC

radicaldreamer wrote: post #132

An aside: One of the best uses for AR that I can imagine is real life ad-block. I’d wear AR glasses all the time if it would automatically replace billboards and other ads with landscapes.

What a shit world but hey I'd probably buy that if I had to live there.

I can't stop thinking about this rental apartment building in my city that's on indigenous land so regulation around advertising doesn't apply (BC) and they have a huge electronic billboard right in front facing probably couple dozen windows.

I feel bad for the people living there, negatively about anyone advertising there and negatively about otherwise very environmentally conscious land owners for allowing this.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#144

Post by cramsession » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

charlieyu1 wrote: post #100

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, if you don’t make yourself known to potential customers you’re very screwed

That’s not a problem for the customers though. Capitalism twists our incentives toward prioritizing return on investment over quality of life. Especially now with the internet, I literally never need ads. I just search for the solution to the problem I’m having. No push needed (or wanted).

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#145

Post by dylan604 » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

catapart wrote: post #57

dylan604 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm much less concerned about being sold in 15-30 secs as much as the "ads" that are paid promotional programming that runs >30 minutes in the middle of a video that is <30 minutes.

That stuff is so bizarre ! I can understand how an advertiser might try to sneak an infomercial onto an ad campaign, and I can understand how it might be attempted on accident. But I can't understand why an ostensible ad platform would ever allow you to upload a 30 min. ad without lots of flags going up and needing some approval.

> and needing some approval.

and here shows just how bad the rot is. I would assume that buying that much "air time" to have your longer content played would come a quite a premium. I would also not be surprised if selling those premiums come with a bonus. There's a reason those paid-programming shows run with no commercials. The cost of airing it paid for all of the ad pods during that block of air time, plus extra for being special snowflake.

If these long content "ads" are flukes, then that also shows the rot of the ad market that this isn't handled as an exception.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#146

Post by pixl97 » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

barbazoo wrote: post #136

charlieyu1 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Is there not always some sort "marketplace" where people see what's being offered one way or another? I don't think we need ads for discovery, I see it more as a nefarious way to occupy space in people's conscious.

>Is there not always some sort "marketplace"

How exactly does that work for virtual products?

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#147

Post by titzer » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 5:59 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #66

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…

I have fallen asleep watching youtube many times. I swear i have woken up in the middle of 20+ minute ads. I thought it was a news article about china when it was an ad. Who knows when the skip button appeared. The few times i have seen these, it has always been a literal fake news show about china.

> I have fallen asleep watching youtube many times.

Interesting new opportunity for YouTube here. Detect your usage patterns and near bed time show you increasingly boring content until you fall asleep, then fill your head with subliminal messages in these long ads.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#148

Post by UltraSane » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 6:00 PM UTC

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…

I discovered that the samsung good lock sound assistant lets you mute all sound from specific apps and allow specific apps to never have their sound be interrupted. So it mute games and have audiobook players to always play audio and this lets me listen to audiobooks while playing games and never have the adds interrupt audio.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#149

Post by bArray » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 6:00 PM UTC

I love the picture of politicians sitting by themselves, annoyed by something as all other people are, and thinking "there's nothing I can do about it". Good on Vietnam for actually doing something about it.

I got a taste of this from an EU MEP that I proposed something to, and they replied "it can't be done because of the law". I then replied "but you make the law, it's literally your job!" - and they looked at me, blank faced. Imagine large rooms filled with people who mindlessly act within a framework they dislike, whilst being the only people who could actually change it, and not having the will to do so. It sounds like some special type of hell.

I shudder to think how many people sitting in positions of power just mindlessly continue doing a thing because of some form of complacency. Madness.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#150

Post by pixl97 » Tue, Jan 06, 2026, 6:00 PM UTC

ksaj wrote: post #129

spencerflem wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the worst part is, from a societal point of view - it doesnt matter if $companyA wins over $companyB, if the reason they won is that there was more Geico ads than Liberty ads etc. We allow every space to be overrun with these things, wasting our time and infecting our brains and in the end its zero-sum for the companies and negative-sum for us. No value anywhere is created.

The bigger problem is those fake "realistic robot dog" ads, and all the other ai-faked products. Why YT and Google in general would want to be associated with such scammery, I do not know.

>Why YT and Google in general would want

They want the numbers to always go up. Scam ads pay just like non-scam ads.

Hence why companies have to be forced not to be assholes with legislation.