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

181–190 of 835 posts

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#181

Post by TechSquidTV »

_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…

When crypto was genuinely new, and I was young, I had hope that one day we might actually embrace micropayments. Turns out I was not only young, but stupid.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#182

Post by Aachen »

thfuran wrote: post #177
Aachen wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ads make available a huge amount of media and services to people who would otherwise be unable to afford it. They don't. Follow the money: why do ads power free services? The advertiser needs to expect to make more money in the scenario where they run the ad as compared to where they don't. The viewer must be spending more money in response to having seen it If the viewer doesn't have the money to pay the first par…

>The advertiser needs to expect to make more money in the scenario where they run the ad as compared to where they don't They don’t necessarily make more money from every user though.

I addressed that above. If that's the point, the people with disposable income who view the ad subsidise the ad broker and the website as a hidden charge on a product which they probably didn't need. It doesn't get less efficient than that. I'd rather that people living under the poverty threshold get subsidised directly

Advertisers/brokers will also do everything to optimise to whom the ad is being shown to not waste they money. Poor people can't turn it into arbitrary cash, they can just waste time on video sites and freemium games while they barely (or don't) have enough money to make ends meet

I guess I am very much in the "let's pay fair and square" corner, both for websites/services and for taxes/subsidies where needed. I don't see it working reliably or efficiently any other way in the long run

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#184

Post by bee_rider »

matthewsinclair wrote: post #79
_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…

I've often wondered what would happen if we _taxed_ advertising [0]. The same rationale applies: it'll never work, and it'll never even be tested, but I agree, it was fun to think about. [0]: https://matthewsinclair.com/blog/0177-what-if-we-taxed-adver...

He talks about a Pigovian tax for ads, which is interesting. I don’t have any thoughts other than “yeah good idea.”

But, something I haven’t fully worked out but have vague suspicions about: are ads actually a tax-favorable business model under the current system? We watch ads in exchange for some service, if it wasn’t an ad-supported service we’d have to pay money for it, and that transaction would be taxed.

Of course, the transaction between the ad network and the company placing the ad is taxed. But it seems like they could have a lot of play, as far as picking where that transaction takes place…

Ads should at least be taxed as heavily as if we had paid for the thing with money, IMO.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#185

Post by Groxx »

DrewADesign wrote: post #64
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…

My favorite most annoying ad tactic is the trick slowing down progress bar. It starts off fast making it seem like it’s going to be, say, a ten-second ad so you decide to suffer through it… but progressively slows so you notice at like the 20 second mark you’re only 2/3 of the way through the progress bar, so probably less than halfway done. Murderous rage.

I'm fond of the ones with a fake close button, so tapping it just launches the ad's site. Instant uninstall and 1-star.

(Yes, I know it's mostly the ad's fault, but there's no practical way to punish them directly. So force apps to pick better-behaving networks.)

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#186

Post by metabagel »

add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #95
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.

At some point, I would imagine we will be able to request content and have an agent skip or otherwise remove advertisements, right? We'll have to wait for that, just like with a DVR, but it seems worth it to me.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#187

Post by maxglute »

_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…

I think my tolerance for ads would be higher if algos stop showing repeat ads, or limit same ad from playing more than X times to user.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#188

Post by master-lincoln »

kyralis wrote: post #135
wolvoleo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Depends on the niche, really. I despise ads, but I can also admit to having learned about products from them that I have subsequently purchased and been pleased with. Sometimes the ad lets me know about an entire type of product that I didn't know existed but found very useful, and I probably didn't even by the actual brand that was advertised. If you consider the general concept of "letting people know what products…

There are still tests and reviews and content where people can show products without being paid by the people producing these products.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#189

Post by MiddleEndian »

bko wrote: post #112
_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…

Better from whom? As a user, maybe. But if you're trying to compete, it's incredibly useful to get exposure. For instance, suppose you run a competitor to Salesforce and you want to buy the Salesforce keyword because you provide a better product. I don't know how you would bootstrap that otherwise. If anything the big businesses use advertising as a protection moat. As a small business, I would def prefer to be in a…

If I search for "Salesforce alternative" and something that isn't Salesforce shows up, great! That's what I want!

If I search for Salesforce and something that isn't Salesforce shows up above Salesforce, the tool I'm using is wrong and I will assume that the promoted product is a scam.

This happened to me yesterday when installing the mobile version of Brotato. Some other game appeared above Brotato in the Google Play store. I already hate Android but this only makes me hate it more. Google already gets an unjustified cut of the money I'm paying for the game, yet on top of that they serve me the wrong result at the top.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#190

Post by immibis »

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…

What about the ones that automatically open the Play Store to the app they're advertising after the ad? I would've thought it's against Play Store ToS to manipulate view count, but clearly Google has a conflict of interest.
Post reply on HN