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

Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

forum.palemoon.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 263 posts

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#241

Post by ManlyBread »

jedberg wrote: post #164
pryelluw wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. To me it simply shows that removing ads is not a big enough benefit make people pay. Which makes sense because people are now used to ads. They will consume the content either way.

But we're talking about people who install a program that purposely defrauds advertisers.

There is no fraud, people running the websites have zero say in how I choose to browse the Internet, even if it means automating ad clicks as a means of protest. I could be doing the same manually, but why bother?

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#242

Post by jhasse »

grzm wrote: post #203
wu_tang_chris wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The topic at hand is whether or not I'm allowed to run the program on my computer. And regardless of what argument you or any other business man 2.0 can proffer, I am. Because it's my computer.

As I understand it, the issue is whether you can run AdNauseam on Pale Moon on your computer. Are there other browsers that allow you to use AdNauseam?

Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/adnauseam/

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#243

Post by jhasse »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #230
hedora wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not sell display ads that are relevant to your target audience? Use pay per impression instead of pay per click. (To the extent AdNauseum succeeds, pay per click won't pay well anyway)

If there were an ad network or agency that did this with a similar level of revenue (or even just close), I'd switch. There isn't. I've looked. For years. I wish there were.

If everyone was using AdNauseam, there would be one.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#244

Post by jhasse »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #205
norikki wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then maybe ad networks aren't the solution. Maybe it's Flatr or a browser like Brave that automatically pays websites you visit a few cents worth of Bitcoin. The current solution of creepy privacy-violating ad networks must go, and alternatives won't develop organically until there is pressure on publishers to find alternatives.

Flattr failed and is relaunching as a content-backing site for journalists. Brave requires a whole new browser with no extensions support and no online sync and doesn't support actual fees or payments, it's an optional distributed tip jar. You want to put pressure on publishers? Refuse to visit their site if you don't like the ads.

> You want to put pressure on publishers? Refuse to visit their site if you don't like the ads.

Visiting their site with AdNauseam might put an even bigger pressure on them than not visiting their site at all.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#245

Post by jhasse »

wolco wrote: post #115

AdNauseam is foolish because if this is a success adnetworks go back to the good old days of the ugly in your face ads to ensure they count you as seeing there ad on each impression. Remember the exit ad that loaded after you left the page? Remember the expanding full page banner? They will be back.

Better than tracking and auto-playing videos.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#246

Post by averagewall »

notgood wrote: post #91
icebraining wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They typically have no say or control over the ad network. How so? They chose the ad network, no?

So what? What happens next? Do I have to ask every creator of ad attacks extensions like AdNauseam if the ad network I wanna use fits in their definition of "good" before adding it to my site? Do I have to ask them for permission about what HTML/JavaScript can I place in my website? Worse, what happens if they think every ad network that fits my user-base is evil? Then what? I still need to make ends meet so should I…

What's good and bad is decided by each individual user, not AdNauseam. They chose AdNauseam because they agree with whatever it does and whatever kinds of ads it targets. It doesn't matter if you agree with it or not, or even if it's hard for you to figure out what "color of water" they don't like. That's what market research is for.

So if all your users decide you're doing something bad, and that puts you out of business, then you probably should be out of business. This isn't unfairness like being arbitrarily banned from Google search or getting fake reviews on Yelp. This is your own users telling you they don't want what you're offering for the price you're charging (having to view ads they don't want).

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#247

Post by lucideer »

jedberg wrote: post #124

I hear a lot of people in here saying, "Yay for AdNauseum, they are fixing the broken ad system! If sites start charging instead of ads, I'll totally pay!" Let me add a little perspective. A long time ago at reddit we launched reddit gold. At the time, one of the biggest benefits was that if you had gold you could turn off ads. This was in direct response to people saying, "I would rather pay you then use adblock". Y…

> My point is, I don't think a lot of you are being totally honest when you say you'd be willing to pay if the site removed advertising.

This is quite an extreme conclusion to draw, as you seem to be overlooking one very large assumption: value.

If I say "I'd be willing to pay if a site removed advertising", that statement is still contingent on that payment providing me with value in return. I do pay for many sites and services on the internet. Reddit is not one of them. It's not a bad site, but for me, it's largely served as a distraction and hasn't really offered me anything I consider worthwhile enough to pay for. This does not equate to me being dishonest because implicit in that is your (incorrect) assumption that Reddit offers every visitor significant value.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#248

Post by [deleted] »

KGIII wrote: post #182
fish_fan wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not on me that clicks are considered meaningful—that's the site owner's problem.

"I did it, but it's not my responsibility." That's what I read from your reply. Suffice to say, we have different morals. And no, I don't have anything that is ad supported. I dislike the tracking and security implications, but not enough to alter my morality. This is morally similar to vandalism, in my opinion. If your okay with that, don't let me tell you how to live. I just can't justify harming people for somethi…

[deleted]

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#249

Post by evilDagmar »

slavik81 wrote: post #208
chii wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, a court of law take into account intent. Misclicking on a link is not fraud, but intentionally misclicking is indeed fraud, if you know if had an intended effect on the budget of the advertiser.

Is it? The user would have to be making a misrepresentation by doing so. Is clicking an ad link really a statement that meaningfully communicates anything? Or is the advertiser merely inferring a meaning and getting it wrong for that user?

That has no bearing here because it's not the user mis-clicking on the link, but the app in question deliberately following a link on behalf of the user with the stated goal of causing harm.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#250

Post by AndrewCHM »

junkculture wrote: post #240
AndrewCHM wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for what its worth, there are over 220 subreddits which have their removal logs made public, via this account: https://www.reddit.com/user/publicmodlogs You can turn off comments by not visiting comment pages

Well, I do run a content blocker on macos/IOS which turns off all comments on all websites, but that's a trifle limiting. What annoys me about reddit comments are the pun "trains," endless reruns of old reddit jokes. Every conversation is swamped with these comments, perhaps deliberately, to drown out unpopular opinions. No wait, the Pao era introduced mass deletions instead.

the general consensus nowdays is that it was Pao being used as a scapegoat more than anything (I think knothing also straight-up admitted to scapegoating too? I can't remember off the top of my head)

https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/3dautm/conte...

Post reply on HN