Just doesn’t feel good • Hacker News Board

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#141

Post by evilduck » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:13 PM UTC

anseljh wrote: post #114

msandford wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If HTTP was a contract whereby you agreed to look at everything that was sent over then your analogy would make sense. But HTTP is a protocol, not a legally binding contract. So no.

The terms of service for the site that's delivered to you over HTTP, though--that is a legally binding contract. Some have no-ad-blocking terms.

Contracts have to be agreed upon by both parties. If you want to have users agree to a ToS and protect your content, you should 401 their requests for your content until that happens. Otherwise fuck off, it's a public request.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#142

Post by msandford » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:13 PM UTC

anseljh wrote: post #114

msandford wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If HTTP was a contract whereby you agreed to look at everything that was sent over then your analogy would make sense. But HTTP is a protocol, not a legally binding contract. So no.

The terms of service for the site that's delivered to you over HTTP, though--that is a legally binding contract. Some have no-ad-blocking terms.

If that were true, then we will start a company together and become rich!

1. Create a website with a TOS that states "all webpages are for your personal consumption only, any permanent copies which are used for business purposes (including indexing!) constitute grave harm to us, worth $100 per instance"

2. Make many, many pages on that website which all link to one another, let's have at least say 1000s of them

3. Ensure that they rank well for very obscure terms, terms which have a very short results list

4. Do not avail ourselves of robots.txt

5. Get our website linked to through means which do not make it obvious that we're trying to get it linked to

6. Wait for google to index the website

7. Gather the evidence of the indexing activity via search results

8. File a lawsuit against google for breach of contract re: TOS and collect millions

If what you're saying is true, then this is a literally foolproof plan to become millionaires (or more!).

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#143

Post by monochromatic » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:13 PM UTC

anseljh wrote: post #114

msandford wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If HTTP was a contract whereby you agreed to look at everything that was sent over then your analogy would make sense. But HTTP is a protocol, not a legally binding contract. So no.

The terms of service for the site that's delivered to you over HTTP, though--that is a legally binding contract. Some have no-ad-blocking terms.

95% of the websites I visit, I've never seen the terms of service. Is it still binding on me?

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#144

Post by charonn0 » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:13 PM UTC

dannyr wrote: post #45

mitchty wrote: post #39

Here is the whole thing about ad supported sites: We are worth a lot less than you think, and also overall an individuals monthly worth in advertisements is also small. https://air.mozilla.org/subscribe2web/ Turns out, we're worth about $6.20/mo in advertising. Lets just round this up to $10/month to not have ads but still support sites we visit. If content providers aren't working on an alternative like the above, I…

So I can go to a store, I don't like how they make money, I'll just take away whatever I want for free? If you don't like how they make money, do not patronize them.

That's not a good analogy. Viewing a web ad is more akin to inviting a traveling salesman into your living room, where he has the opportunity to paw through your unmentionables, steal your valuables, and even burn your house down if not closely monitored and restricted in his activities.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#145

Post by w4 » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:15 PM UTC

sovande wrote: post #134

w4 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is like kicking kittens and then announcing to the world that you're going to stop kicking kittens. Then why kick kittens in the first place? Sure. That having been said, people do things all the time without realizing how it's going to make them feel. Marco made an ad blocker, turns out it made him feel bad, so he's going to stop doing it. Fair enough. I'm not trying to suggest Marco is some Saint here. Like…

> Fair enough Not really, because now all those who bought "Peace" in good faith feel bad. We trusted this guy to deliver a good product and then it disappears under us. Grrrrr..

You can get a refund for your purchase at the link he provided. No harm, no foul.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#146

Post by amyjess » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:16 PM UTC

Should probably get a better title. Sure, it's the name of the blog post, but that's a really ambiguous name.

I suggest "Making an ad blocker myself just doesn't feel good".

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#147

Post by bryanlarsen » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:16 PM UTC

shanecleveland wrote: post #88

bryanlarsen wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the verge pointed out[1], small publishers do have a way to get paid that will work a lot better than subscriptions. They'll just put their content on Facebook -- ad blockers don't work inside the Facebook app. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10233010

Doesn't do anything for sites not considered "publishers." Popular "tools," such as calculators, forms, etc. will not have these Facebook-type options.

I over simplified the Verge story. They said that everybody that currently depends on web ad revenue would either move to Facebook and/or a native app running iAds.

Either way, it's a pretty pessimistic view of the future of the web.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#148

Post by makeitsuckless » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:16 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #32

cstross wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively: I am seeing a lot of angry articles by journalists who see adblockers as an existential threat to them, and Marco also developed Instapaper. He's almost certainly already getting hate mail from content sites who don't like the way that Instapaper renders their content readable without allowing annoying intrusions. Releasing Peace on top of Instapaper set him up as a high-profile target -- even higher w…

Why exactly do you think that's a dispositive argument? Poll the public about their appetite for paywalls and you'll get an even more vigorous response --- paywalls are reviled by normal people. And yet logically, if you think ad-supported content isn't a good model, you should support paywalls. They're transparent and up-front and don't require cross-site tracking. Really, this is pretty simple: people just want it…

Just because you're okay with the exploitation of information by making access artificially scarce doesn't mean that those who aren't are "entitled".

Since the arrival of the internet, that business model stopped working in the interest of society in general.

We're no longer funding the wider dissemination of information, we're either funding artificially limiting access or being asked to surrender our privacy instead of just money.

This may make perfect business sense, but in my view, societies interests go before business interests.

And yes, I also fear that without an alternative model we're going to have a hard time encouraging the production of that information within the framework of the free market.

But I rather face that challenge than to accept a society where information disappears behind paywalls and our privacy is being demolished by commercial surveillance.

Just because what the public wants is selfish and generally short sighted doesn't mean they're wrong to want it.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#149

Post by s73v3r » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:16 PM UTC

ixtli wrote: post #55

I hate this supposition that everyone should bend over backwards to allow people who make money in a certain way continue making money in that way. Am I the only one thinks that the user's experience should be more important than everything else? Annoying advertisements are, in practice, the result of people failing to be creative in monetization. Ars Technica, for instance, has done a great job of integrating ads in…

"I hate this supposition that everyone should bend over backwards to allow people who make money in a certain way continue making money in that way. Am I the only one thinks that the user's experience should be more important than everything else?"

What's the user experience of an app that dies because it doesn't have the revenue to continue?

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#150

Post by s73v3r » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 6:17 PM UTC

ixtli wrote: post #124

benihana wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Am I the only one thinks that the user's experience should be more important than everything else? No. I value UX over almost everything, but you have to realize that your values don't exist in a vacuum. Without something to keep the lights on and the AC blowing air on the servers, UX is pointless and doesn't amount to anything.

But what you're supposing is that there is _no way_ for people to profit off of their content except to bother me with invasive advertising. I simply can't accept this: the history of our industry and capitalism as a whole is a case study in how clever people are at monetization.

Then come up with something better.