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

421–430 of 835 posts

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#421

Post by layer8 »

Auracle wrote: post #359
phantasmish wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I go looking for a directory of [service, in my area] that’s hardly an ad! If those include, say, reviews and pricing info, great! Yes, please! I definitely don’t want that directory to be skewed with ads in favor of those with the most money, or who have decided to burn the most of their limited resources on ads instead of improving their services, lowering their prices, or hell, just taking more profit. The ads…

Who is maintaining and paying for this directory?

Those who are interested in knowing what services exist.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#422

Post by zie »

SoftTalker wrote: post #341
ksaj wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

lite.cnn.com is the best lightweight news site I know of, though it is still CNN and probably more US-focused.

There is also https://text.npr.org

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#423

Post by elevatortrim »

_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…

Absolutely. The world would be vastly better off without 2 things:

- Ads. Lower quality products/services perform better with more/better ads.

- Venture Capital. Services out-compete others by using free money early on, killing the free market.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#424

Post by pc86 »

lloeki wrote: post #208
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…

You missed one of the worst: mandatory interactive ones. My wife is a sucker for these horribly generic flashy F2P puzzle-ish games. There are these ads that pop up every N action or something; some of these look like a mini-game and are actually an ad for another of those F2P games, and you have to play the mini-game that showcases some dumb simple mechanic of the game it advertises for a little bit before you can d…

Some of these ads are annoying, almost all of the them are dumb, but if you think they're abusive, I don't think you know what the word abuse means.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#425

Post by [deleted] »

keybored wrote: post #413
engineer_22 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe every advanced social system has a propensity towards totalitarianism. Similar criticisms can easily be foisted on feudalism, mercantilism, socialism, anarchism, etc. I think in Western Liberal Capitalism there's still space for a middle class. More, it appears the peculiar features of this system have enabled it to unlock tremendous social vigor and provide for the People historic material wealth. Perhaps what…

I’m at a loss as to what these abstract to the heavens responses even mean to reply to. What I commented on was the propaganda tactics of capitalism. The topic in itself wasn’t even about the merits of it (but see the last sentence). What you get in response though are these chin-stroking platitudes about but maybe all social systems have their faults , and ah but look at how full and bountiful my fridge is because o…

[deleted]

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#426

Post by layer8 »

rick_dalton wrote: post #239
phantasmish wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what a fucking store is for . They have catalogs. You could ask for one. If they think people will want something they will try to sell it and will tell you about it if you go looking . I see this pro-ads argument all the time and it’s so obviously-stupid that I’m truly baffled. Is this the kind of lie ad folks tell themselves so they can sleep at night?

So instead of buying ad space we can now buy catalog space and reinvent the wheel.

The principle would be that companies aren’t allow to buy placement. It would be like a phonebook.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#427

Post by JumpCrisscross »

_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…

> often wondered whether the world would be better without ads

You’d probably have to compromise on free speech, since the line between ads and public persuasion is ambiguous to the point of non-existence.

Better middle steps: ban on public advertising (e.g. no billboards, first-party-only signage). Ban on targeted digital advertising. Ban on bulk unsolicited mail or e-mail.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#428

Post by elevatortrim »

hk__2 wrote: post #324
lm28469 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you waited for an ad to solve your "legitimate problem" you didn't have a problem to begin with imho

You might not know it is a problem and that it is solvable.

Yes but the amount of that happening is nowhere near enough to justify the ad-world we are living in.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#429

Post by layer8 »

carlosjobim wrote: post #218
phantasmish wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what a fucking store is for . They have catalogs. You could ask for one. If they think people will want something they will try to sell it and will tell you about it if you go looking . I see this pro-ads argument all the time and it’s so obviously-stupid that I’m truly baffled. Is this the kind of lie ad folks tell themselves so they can sleep at night?

Brands pay stores for shelf space. How would you stop that in practice?

By making it illegal? Brands can still compete on price and quality.

Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads

#430

Post by mrweasel »

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…

Part of the issue may also be that to many companies rely on selling ads as their main source of revenue and there simply isn't enough money in "good ads" to fund all the services we've come to expect to be free.

There simply isn't enough ads for soft drinks, supermarkets or cars to reasonably fund the tech industry as it currently exists. Ad funded Facebook, perfectly fine, but that's not a $200B company, not without questionable ads for gambling, scams and shitty China plastic products.

Platforms should have higher standards, accept lower profit margins and charge users if needed, rather than resort to running ads for stuff we all now is garbage.

Post reply on HN