Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

sherwood.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 549 posts

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#181

Post by insane_dreamer »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #86
macNchz wrote: post #16

Alongside a password manager and keeping things up to date, using an ad blocker is truly a foundational security practice these days. The big advertising players simply have all of the wrong incentives to control this problem. They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks, but it’d be worse for them on two fronts: they’d have to pay for more moderation, and they’d lose billions in reven…

The answer isn't ad blocking, the answer is paying directly and in full (so no need to subsidize cost with ads) for the service. I cannot wrap my head around how generally intelligent people are completely blind to this. I guess 20 years of ad-block-is-the-norm has left people totally confused about internet monetization. I've never encoutered a problem that has such a clear answer, and that so many intelligent peopl…

> We need to start paying for ad-free services. Wake up.

The services (FB etc.) don't want this model, and it's not like the users can force them to switch to a paid model.

Also, a large percentage of users don't care and believe that "free" is better.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#182

Post by simpaticoder »

zoeysmithe wrote: post #106
simpaticoder wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*>They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks I'm not entirely sure that's true. It's equivalent to asking a platform to moderate all "harmful content" off the site. "Scam" is fundamentally subjective, just as "harm" is. The real solution is to reform the justice system such that a citizen feeling they've been defrauded has a quick and easy process to get satisfaction for themselves a…

Scams are absolutely not subjective and capitalism fails at every level without regulation like this. Your comment is very libertarian housecat coded. Also 'just go to court' is such a naive take. As someone who has been in litigation before I can tell you those $350/hr billings add up quick. How many consumers can afford a 5 or even 6 digit legal bill for being scammed for a few hundred or thousands dollars on a FB…

People's first instinct is to attack the thing they don't like directly. The second instinct should be to consider the system in which those things arise, and what the incentives are for everyone involved. If you have a roomful of loud children, you could apply draconian rules on silence; or, if you notice there is no sound-deadening and so the children are unwittingly participating in a positive feedback loop to be heard above the din, you can add material. My goal is not a libertarian one, its a minimalism one. Streamlining the court system has many other benefits besides this one; the excessive cost and time required to use the court is used systematically by malefactors at every level of society. From patent trolls to absurd rates of criminal prosecutions that are never heard by a jury, it's an enormous problem in our society.

Regulation always seems simple, but there are inevitable unintended consequences. Sadly, those who see regulation as the only or best tool to shape behavior are quick to suggest yet more regulation to fix those unintended consequences, either unaware of the positive feedback loop or certain there exists some set of regulation that will finally, perfectly fix the system. I find this way of thinking naive; it is almost always better to make adjustments to the system to shape behavior that way. And in this case, the obvious way to do that is to fix the courts, and make justice affordable again.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#183

Post by scott_w »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #86
macNchz wrote: post #16

Alongside a password manager and keeping things up to date, using an ad blocker is truly a foundational security practice these days. The big advertising players simply have all of the wrong incentives to control this problem. They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks, but it’d be worse for them on two fronts: they’d have to pay for more moderation, and they’d lose billions in reven…

The answer isn't ad blocking, the answer is paying directly and in full (so no need to subsidize cost with ads) for the service. I cannot wrap my head around how generally intelligent people are completely blind to this. I guess 20 years of ad-block-is-the-norm has left people totally confused about internet monetization. I've never encoutered a problem that has such a clear answer, and that so many intelligent peopl…

> The answer isn't ad blocking, the answer is paying directly and in full

Netflix started showing ads on their lower tiers: https://help.netflix.com/en/node/126831

If you pay for Sky/Virgin/insert Cable provider in your country, you still get copious amounts of ads. If you pay to go to the cinema, you have to sit through 15 minutes of adverts before the film starts.

I'm buying off Amazon, they're showing sponsored products (so... ads).

EA were looking at putting ads into games that you bought back in 2024: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/ea-are-thinking-about-inser...

Hell, I pay for public transport, they have adverts on.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#184

Post by 1970-01-01 »

ruined wrote: post #153
1970-01-01 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the analogy applies the same way. Meta simply choose to be evil not because it costs less overall but because they're unable to provide/filter actually useful ads to consumers. The rear diff is instead a filthy window but consumers don't sue for better quality because everything else works good enough and those that do crash could have cleaned the windows themselves.

ability "to provide/filter actually useful ads" is a function of moderation budget and not much else

To them it's all an algorithm. Human moderation is completely infeasible at their massive scale.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#185

Post by zahlman »

macNchz wrote: post #16

Alongside a password manager and keeping things up to date, using an ad blocker is truly a foundational security practice these days. The big advertising players simply have all of the wrong incentives to control this problem. They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks, but it’d be worse for them on two fronts: they’d have to pay for more moderation, and they’d lose billions in reven…

Just to be clear, the engagement is the problem, yes? We're reasonably secure against zero-click malware from ads by now I would hope?

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#186

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

strogonoff wrote: post #138
the_snooze wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you're not paying for the product, you are the product." It's an outdated way of looking at tech. Many classes of paid products (e.g., cars, streaming services, IoT, operating systems) double-dip into tracking and advertisement. Why would a business actually want to do the hard work of serving user needs when they can hedge their bets with ad revenue? Line must go up.

First, in any case, the right solution is to make this business model (treating your users as a product, whether by offering free service or heavily discounted/subsidised product) simply illegal. It violates the way market is supposed to work and exploits information asymmetry—regulation against which there is plenty of precedent of. This makes the rest moot, but I will still list why I don’t think it’s like you say…

When someone opens with “there oughta, be a law”… they’re almost always shouldn’t be.

No. You’re not going to regulate out human behavior or scammers or MBA’s looking for every avenue to maximize profit.

Make a better system.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#187

Post by [deleted] »

DonHopkins wrote: post #176
9rx wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a contractual party is not acting in good faith, there is a legal system to address that. But I know you will say that the legal system doesn't act in good faith, so... I guess you're screwed. Such is the pitfall of living under a dictatorship.

What are we supposed to do about the fact that you are not arguing in good faith? I'm not buying what you're selling.

[deleted]

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#188

Post by frankc »

fouronnes3 wrote: post #28
macNchz wrote: post #16

Alongside a password manager and keeping things up to date, using an ad blocker is truly a foundational security practice these days. The big advertising players simply have all of the wrong incentives to control this problem. They could massively reduce the volume of scams advertised on their networks, but it’d be worse for them on two fronts: they’d have to pay for more moderation, and they’d lose billions in reven…

I don't see how the yearly tech support I do with my parents at Christmas will not one day converge to an outright ban of the internet. I am now demoing the level of sofistication of AI powered scams, telling them that it is now entirely possible they will get a VIDEO CALL from me that's not actually me asking for God knows what in a very convincing way using my face and voice. I am scared and this close to setting u…

We are all going to need to have personal passwords/safe words we don't reveal to untrusted parties for authentication. Or maybe personal retinal scanners? I think personal auth might be an interesting startup to get ahead of this.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#189

Post by 9rx »

DonHopkins wrote: post #176
9rx wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a contractual party is not acting in good faith, there is a legal system to address that. But I know you will say that the legal system doesn't act in good faith, so... I guess you're screwed. Such is the pitfall of living under a dictatorship.

What are we supposed to do about the fact that you are not arguing in good faith? I'm not buying what you're selling.

> I'm not buying what you're selling

Which is why I'm not providing what you seek. Production goes to he who is paying, and in this case I am the one doing the paying. Thus, you know the content is written for me and me alone.

> What are we supposed to do about the fact that you are not arguing in good faith?

A rational actor acting in good faith would start talking terms to see the sale go through, but as you are also here in bad faith we can continue to write only for respective selves. Nobody was expecting anything else anyway. I don't imagine anyone has ever paid someone else to write a comment on HN and that isn't about to change today.

Re: Meta projected 10% of 2024 revenue came from scams

#190

Post by randycupertino »

Havoc wrote: post #52

Meta is cooked. It's not just scam portion - their entire strategy is in trouble FB - nobody I know actively uses it anymore. Insta - is being overrun with AI slop and given meta's stated goal of adding more AI interactions on their platforms I doubt they'll even try to get a grip on it let alone succeed Whatsapp & FB messenger - some use but has zero moat over other messengers. It's a completely fungible service in…

Is anyone actually buying and using their glasses? I've tried to find actual sales figures but they keep it very opaque. I am so curious if despite how hard they are pushing them they will just be another flash-in-the-pan. I just can't see wide-market adoptability, maybe some niche users, but maybe I am just a hater/cynic.
Post reply on HN