801–810 of 835 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Until you try to grapple with real world problems like limited shelf space, limited directory space, how the ads (ahem sorry, directory entries) should be sorted, how to deal with setting boundaries around local directories, etc.
Good thing there is no fundamental law of the universe forcing merchants to stock every single good ever invented.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you watch him on Joe Rogan’s podcast he gives a full overview of how every single tiny detail down to colors, length of scene cuts, facial expressions, language, total length of videos, time of day for release, thumbnails, sound effects, music is extensively A/B tested to not only optimize for the algorithm but for hijacking people’s attention as well. That weird creepy face with the outline and uncanny smoothing…
How do you A/B test on YouTube?
He also changes the thumbnails and titles of videos once published, sometimes up to dozen times in the first day.
He also has dozens of channels for different languages, so can test thumbnails and other tweaks with those.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you search? Google? That's typically part of marketing spend. It may not be pure ads as in I pay google, they display my ad. But it's still a company spending money to get their result to the top so you are more likely to see it. Ads solve the discovery problem. Without ads, people still try to solve the discovery problem and try to get your attention. Are those methods still ads?
> Without ads, people still try to solve the discovery problem and try to get your attention. Are those methods still ads? examples?
- SEO optimization to get to the top of the search result page
- Paying influencers to use their product
- Paying people to post on forums about the product
- Sending / sponsoring reviewers
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Basically the internet version of the Volkswagen emissions scandal. if(testdetected == 1) ecm.lowemissions else lmao.fuckyouregulators
the difference is that the average rube and/or average lawmaker have some basic understanding of how cars work. petrol goes in, toxic gas comes out, so make toxic gas less. most of them have 0% understanding as to how data mining works or how online ads (and scams) function
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Geez, if you think people don't like banner ads or billboards, you should see what they think of town criers.
Criers are expensive. And I'd say that mattress shop guy qualifies and he doesn't bother me that much. I would happily take a deal that gets rid of all tv and video ads and replaces them with as many independent criers as companies are willing to pay.
You could probably hire a lot of “town criers” on fiver for the cost of a 30 second TV spot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good thing there is no fundamental law of the universe forcing merchants to stock every single good ever invented.
Without advertising (or marketing of some kind), how do you propose for any new product to EVER reach a store shelf.
It's not society's problem to ensure corporations are able to take prime real estate by abusing their customers.
They can meet with every shop owner and argue why their products should be sold, although if you ask me I bet the shop owner knows exactly what their customers want so once again where is the benefit for society here? That some greedy people aren't able to make a buck abusing human psychology?
Once again, what is the benefit for society here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely the world wouldn’t be better without all ads, because that would be a clear violation of free speech. However ads should be limited only to communication channels that are optional to engage in. As for example, an ad on YouTube, a private video platform, should be perfectly fine. That’s part of the product. On the other hand, ads on a highway, on the street, should not be allowed. I have not given permissi…
If free speech is you rolling up with a megaphone to yell promotional nonsense at me, then it's my free speech to vote for you to get banned I think.
You guys did not read past the first sentence?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Appealing isn’t the goal. Catching someone’s attention is the goal. (Nobody thinks the balloons on the cars at the car dealership look good but statistics prove that balloons sell cars. ) Then, triggering someone’s curiosity, which is more where the copy comes in. ( You can increase your click count with this one weird trick! ) You’re subject to it every bit as much as me or anybody else, but for whatever reason, we…
If you're aware of it and think you're susceptible then you can make it impossible to be influenced by it. Ie, You can disable all 'related videos'/feeds/home page on Youtube with Unhook, and sponsored segments with SponsorBlock. I'll probably never see a Youtube thumbnail for the rest of my life, throw in Adblock and your exposure is extremely limited. > Sales guys love people like that. You can also easily never sp…
This is not specific to YouTube. It’s billboards, product placement, etc etc etc.
> You can also easily never speak to them. I know they exist, but as a consumer I can't think of anytime I've had a sales interaction with a salesperson
Ok, so you make every major purchase online, probably don’t own a car, never purchased a home or lived in a city where its extremely difficult to rent without a realtor, never go out to restaurants or bars in the US where the service staff essentially works on commission in the form of gratuity… sure thing.
Thinking Sony would sell just as many products entirely based on word of mouth is absolutely absurd.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Criers are expensive. And I'd say that mattress shop guy qualifies and he doesn't bother me that much. I would happily take a deal that gets rid of all tv and video ads and replaces them with as many independent criers as companies are willing to pay.
I will note we effectively have that law already for political text spam. No robo-texting it has to come from a “real” person. Doesn’t seem to have changed the amount of text spam I get, they just all start with “This is Bob from People Against Things …” You could probably hire a lot of “town criers” on fiver for the cost of a 30 second TV spot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and showing it to people who don't want to see it. So, do superbowl ads not count as ads because a non-negligible portion of the viewership wants to see them? Or are you saying that there needs to be a non-negligible fraction of the viewers who don’t want to see it for it to be an ad?
In the end it doesn't really matter. That's under 0.1% of TV viewing and it's a unique situation. Yes edge cases exist, edge cases always exist, but that's a very tiny one.
(Though, that doesn’t imply that the best available definition won’t have any edge cases like this.)
I think it works better to define whether or not something is advertising based on, rather than whether the viewer wants to see it, instead by whether those putting the media where it is intend for viewing it to be (as far as they can make it) a requirement for something else.
Though, I’m not sure that even that should be considered a requirement. It seems to me like the things businesses paid money to get put on the million dollar website, should count as “ads”. I don’t see why we should define “ads” to refer exclusively to objectionable ads.