Live data from Hacker News

What we break when we fix ad blocking

tonyhaile.com

121–130 of 226 posts

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#121
I'm just going to re-quote one of my comments from a previous topic that was flagged to death:

>Back in the early internet era, the best content was available for free of charge. If anything, that's still the case even today. Try to google on some technical topics like Ohm's law or something and you'll find very old websites built with good ole' HTML tables providing the information you need crisp and clear.

>Actually, I disagree. This is 2015. If I want to start a website on a certain topic, say about cars or electronics, I can find some really good free hosts who will support me without any sneazy catches. As a real example, I go to blogger.com, setup a new blog with my own custom theme, (with all the attribution to blogger removed if I want to) and start producing content. Not cool with blogspot? Then, how about Github pages? Not so technical? How about using a free shared web host (there are plenty, Google them)?

>If your objective is to spread information and knowledge, you will do that no matter what. It is when your objective is guised as spreading information when you really want to make money and scale up doing so, then you run into a problem. The problem with this kind of appeal against ad-blocking is the same old argument of "How much is too much?" "We need money to support our website to keep it up and running". But, never do these authors disclose how much they really need as long as they're making a killer profit. The problem with mixing ads with content is that introduces a conflict of interest - Are you writing that content because you like writing, or are you writing that content to get more eyeballs to serve your advertisers? And it's very hard to convince your readers that you don't intend to make money from them although you have ads on your site.

>For your reference, I do own a blog myself without any ads whatsoever and I think this is the future we're heading towards. I am a proud user of adblock software and I refused to be shamed for that. As would any user, I am concerned about the content first, which is the logical reason why I go to a site. But, if the site tries hard to ruin my experience to make it difficult for me to consume that content, then of course, I'll find a way to circumvent it. But, that doesn't mean I don't support the authors of the site, just that as everyone else, I have my own way of supporting them. Just like how I've been donating to Wikipedia all these years. There have been too many sites abusing the slogan of "We need to place ads so we can support ads" to buy back our lost trust. Sure, there will be a lot of content weeded out because they can't support themselves, but I am confident that the ones whose objectives are to spread information will do so no matter what.

>We built the internet ourselves when no one gave us ads to support our efforts back then. And we'll find a way to do it again. Just takes time and patience.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#122
post #116

It's pretty clear to me that the endgame for this is ad-blocking-blockers: You run an ad blocker, then you either pay to visit my site or you disable your ad blocker for my site. That's going to slow down sites even more, but that's the tragedy of the commons: some sites will be obnoxious in the ads they show it forces people to use ad-blockers. That destroys the livelihood of so many people that countermeasures will…

Unless the way the web works fundamentally changes, it will always be easier to block ads than to detect and block adblockers.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#123
post #118
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm going to keep repeating this because everyone seems to frame the debate in the wrong terms. As it turns out, you're guilty of the same thing everyone else is, because you've absolutely missed the point of enabling ad blockers on iPhone For Apple, it serves two purposes, both of which are hugely anti-competitive. They'll most likely get away with it, due to the fact that they have a minority share of the global…

Android allows ad-blocking in its store, Chrome too. But now that apple is doing it, suddenly its anti-competitive. Give me a break

[deleted]

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#125
This reminds me of a concert experience back in the days. The venue had curtain in front of the stage where they shot a projector and somebody had forgot to full-screen the slide show and the entire audience could see napster running in the task bar.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#126
post #124

[deleted]

Except for the html page you didn't specifically request anything. javascript, images, Css, cookies keeping you logged in, favicon, video, music, game assets. None of that is explicitly requested by the user.

More over, there is no technical reason why ads needs to be loaded from a third party by the browser. You could easily include them server side.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think good content necessarily needs to be paid for. Much of the best content on the web is created as a hobby, with no attempt to monetize, like dr-iguana.com (and countless others.) Other awesome ad-free content is created to promote retail within the same company, like sparkfun.com. It seems to me the ease of monetization with ad-networks drive ultra-low quality content like about.com, though even I must a…

> I don't think good content necessarily needs to be paid for. Much of the best content on the web is created as a hobby, with no attempt to monetize, like dr-iguana.com (and countless others.) I felt that way for a long time. I am basically living that philosophy. My blog[1] has always been free to read and free from ads. I wrote a book[2], and you can read the entire thing online for free, again with no ads. Almost…

Your thesis is hindered by the fact that poor people don't generally work, and so have plenty of time to share their stories.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/a-profile-of-the-working...

The problem is more likely the fact that their stories rarely fit your narrative, and so no one wants to hear them.

I'm not sure why you believe that a story of people living in a mansion, driving fancy cars and having money problems is unrealistic. I know a number of (upper) middle class folks with exactly that problem - solid income, spendthrift wife, and constant money problems. Consider this iconic story, originally pushed by the NYT as a story of poor middle class victims of evil banks: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/05/the-road...

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#128
post #4

I'm going to keep repeating this because everyone seems to frame the debate in the wrong terms. Ad blocking for me is not about speed or security. Those are just nice side effects. It is also not because I do not want to pay. I don't mind paying. It is because when I'm in the middle of something I do not want to be told to pay someone else for goods I do not need. I don't care how unobtrusive it is (well, if it's onl…

We need better ads, e.g. a comeback of the traditional banner ads where ads where just a single picture with a link.

If you really need a video ad, create a small size mp4 movie and add a link, e.g. 70KB for 30s video.

But nowadays ads are too overblown with huge JS code, invasive behaviors, and still a lot of flash animations and videos. Basically the current situation is the fault of many advertisement networks that produce bad ads and pay little to the website owner. And many website owners that put too many ads on their sites and have choosen the wrong ad networks.

A subscription model won't work for many sites. (there will always be another site like yours that will offer the content for free sponsored by ads, and you will loose most of your traffic) Also it would mean a come back of the dark ages before the WorldWideWeb when Bill Gates had his failed idea about "The Microsoft Network" (1995 MSN version 1) and when there were still teletext services like BTX in Germany where you had to pay premium price to view each single (text) page. The idea of paying $3/month for 100 websites won't fly, such ideas come from individuals that think Facebook is the internet and only visit Facebook and maybe two other websites.

None of the subscription and pay per view model were too successful, obviously the free WorldWideWeb with the ad model won. And if there is a need for an ad blocker, then only one that blacklists & blocks the very bad ad network players. Ads that crash the mobile browser, flash ads, video ads with enabled audio, popup ads, invasive tracking.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#129
post #99
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a sports related web site I often read (friends link to it from facebook, and other sites I visit).. When reading it on mobile, almost the entire page will load, then my whole phone (LG G4) freezes up completely for about 8 seconds, then a full page add appears over the screen. Sometimes the "X" is in the upper right, sometimes below, etc, and if you are off even the slightest amount, you get a new chrome ta…

One thing is for certain, publishers aren't using cohorts for how browser-breaking advertising is influencing their user retention and overall revenue. Fuck, some of the JS just for news site UI makes it clear no one is even testing their mobile sites on an actual mobile device. If the ad block rate gets high enough, and if the CPMs do not increase in the face of dwindling supply, publishers will just make content av…

I think they're ok with the clicks it brings from naive/confused smartphone users, which is exactly how wicked it is.
Post reply on HN