The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com • Hacker News Board

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#281

Post by jhall1468 » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 9:19 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #217

dwild wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most content is worthless. Which is why ads are the only way to monetize it and be able to actually have it somewhere. > The purpose can easily be filled by some alternate, free material. Except nothing is free. Someone has to pay for it. If it's not ad networks and if it's not donations (again, mostly because most content is worthless, and probably also because most people are greedy), who will pay for it? > Very…

> Which is why ads are the only way to monetize it and be able to actually have it somewhere. Why do we need to have it somewhere if nobody wants it enough to pay for it? > Except nothing is free. Someone has to pay for it. If it's not ad networks and if it's not donations (again, mostly because most content is worthless, and probably also because most people are greedy), who will pay for it? People who want to disse…

> Why do we need to have it somewhere if nobody wants it enough to pay for it?

Yes, because search engines are basically elitist.

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#282

Post by 67726e » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 9:44 PM UTC

bigbugbag wrote: post #266

67726e wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, you know, that time Sony installed a rootkit from music CDs.

Funny thing those were not actuals CDs, Philips asked Sony to stop using the official CD logo on those infected discs or face a lawsuit.

What do you mean they weren't CDs? They weren't "licensed" or they were something else entirely?

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#283

Post by dikaiosune » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 9:58 PM UTC

intrasight wrote: post #270

dikaiosune wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would have a deleterious effect on the editorial independence of their content, I imagine.

Yes it will. But if they are ad supported in the gaming hardware niche then they probably never had independence.

That probably depends on their ad model. For example, I would imagine that Google ads would not cause them to change their editorial model, while a referral-based network or a more niche banner network might exert some influence.

Further, whether they were truly independent to begin with is beside the question of whether it would make them less independent or not.

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#284

Post by lazyjones » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 9:58 PM UTC

jhall1468 wrote: post #279

lazyjones wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Name me one other form of a successful website that does not use one of the following methods of monetization: My former company (founded in 2000; majority sold in 2014; ~2.5 million users) has 95% revenue from other sources than those you named, it's a price comparison website. Most competitors operate in a similar fashion. Ads are used only as an insignificant additional revenue source (with lots of doubt and dis…

> large classified ad pages It literally has the word "ad" in it. > dating websites Either ad-driven or membership based, in which case the membership is received as a currency-exchange. > real estate brokers (syndicated/search websites) Just because your content is an ad doesn't make it less an ad. > airbnb See above. > hotel and flight booking sites. See above. Every one of those sites are classified ad sites, whic…

> 1. All the content is the ad. 2. It's not unique content, it's content created for the sole purposes of selling something.

Google Search fits the same definition. It has no unique content (CSE and booking sites do by the way, they have product information, reviews and ratings etc.) and it only points to other sites, just like their ads.

> Literally everything you listed requires that there be something to sell, whether a product or sex/dating. So the Internet should effectively be one big shopping district?

No, selling something is just one way of getting revenue without annoying the user. Perhaps more websites should try it.

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#285

Post by 13thLetter » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 10:25 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #251

13thLetter wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> right now, ads serve as a redistribution mechanism If you wanted to redistribute wealth to the global poor, forcing everyone (poor and not-poor alike) to download massive, useless megabytes of untargeted advertising, malware, and phishing scams is not the most efficient way to do it. This is defending the current broken and destructive ad regime on the basis of a distant third-order effect.

What you've wrote is almost a perfect example of the Nirvana fallacy. Yes, the current ad system is inefficient, regularly disruptive and even occasionally destructive. But it's here and it's redistributing, while the proponents of alternatives don't even mention that aspect, let alone have a working solution. And it might be a "distance third-order effect" to you, but as someone who lives in a country where credit c…

> Yes, the current ad system is inefficient, regularly disruptive and even occasionally destructive. But it's here and it's redistributing,

Talk about fallacies! Based on that kind of argument, you can defend any awful, destructive policy if it benefits someone, somewhere.

> as someone who lives in a country where credit cards are rare and the average wage is under $15k/y, it's not as abstract to me.

I'm sorry, but I can't seem to find the contract I signed where I agreed to be tracked by giant corporations and choke all my devices to the point of nonfunctionality with malware and ads just so a stranger wouldn't have to pay for content. Maybe you have a copy?

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#286

Post by cm2187 » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 10:26 PM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #249

cm2187 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They might but how would they correlate me on abc.com and me on xyz.com if they don't have some form of cookie? Browser fingerprinting is the only way I can think of, and between the phasing out of flash, java and silverlight, and having javascript disabled by default, browser fingerprinting is pretty much toothless.

If they're talking to a central ad server they can tell it what cookies they're seeing.

Yes but how do you correlate the two cookies?

I go on site abc.com, which gives me the cookie abc:111 Then I go on xyz.com which gives me the cookie xyz:222

Because of the same origin policy, xyz.com can't access the cookies set by abc.com. Abc and xyz can communicate as much as they want on the server side, they will not be able to tell that abc:111 and xyz:222 are the same user (absent additional information: browser fingerprinting, email address if you have an account on both, etc).

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#287

Post by yuhong » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 10:34 PM UTC

alextgordon wrote: post #178

tomjen3 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That won't work for small sites that aren't going to have a million monthly views, which means you are effectively chocking of new websites, or forcing them to proxy the request through their own site, thus pointlessly driving up the cost. I get that some people don't want to be tracked (I don't mind as long as I can selectively turn it of), but please at least be honest about what you don't like.

In fact it only works for small sites. Big sites will get on the default blocklist right away.

Which is why the user should be able to change it.

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#288

Post by jessaustin » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 10:52 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #286

jessaustin wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're talking to a central ad server they can tell it what cookies they're seeing.

Yes but how do you correlate the two cookies? I go on site abc.com, which gives me the cookie abc:111 Then I go on xyz.com which gives me the cookie xyz:222 Because of the same origin policy, xyz.com can't access the cookies set by abc.com. Abc and xyz can communicate as much as they want on the server side, they will not be able to tell that abc:111 and xyz:222 are the same user (absent additional information: brows…

D'oh! You're right of course.

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#289

Post by icebraining » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 10:59 PM UTC

13thLetter wrote: post #285

icebraining wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you've wrote is almost a perfect example of the Nirvana fallacy. Yes, the current ad system is inefficient, regularly disruptive and even occasionally destructive. But it's here and it's redistributing, while the proponents of alternatives don't even mention that aspect, let alone have a working solution. And it might be a "distance third-order effect" to you, but as someone who lives in a country where credit c…

> Yes, the current ad system is inefficient, regularly disruptive and even occasionally destructive. But it's here and it's redistributing, Talk about fallacies! Based on that kind of argument, you can defend any awful, destructive policy if it benefits someone, somewhere. > as someone who lives in a country where credit cards are rare and the average wage is under $15k/y, it's not as abstract to me. I'm sorry, but I…

You seem to be assuming a lot from my posts; please don't. I'm not saying we should keep the existing system, and I'm not saying you should have to accept tracking. What I'm saying is that bad_user has a point regarding redistribution, and that anti-advertising advocates should deal with it instead of whistling and pretending it'll only affect Buzzfeed, like the post I originally replied to did.

Re: The Devastating Effect of Ad-Blockers for Guru3D.com

#290

Post by icebraining » Sun, Nov 01, 2015, 11:18 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #256

icebraining wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also agree that ads aren't the only or best way to make it happen. But they are the existing way. It's well known what tends to happen when structures are eliminated with promises of better tomorrows.

It's been "the existing way" for only 20-30 years. Before that we had newspapers, libraries, town criers, monks copying manuscripts by hand, phone trees, who knows what else. A webpage with an ad is hardly the only available means of disseminating information. There are other options even right now with donation supported sites, sites supported by sales of affiliated merchandise, manufacturer websites with product da…

"Let them eat newspapers"?

We're not talking about a return to the past; we're talking about a two tier system, where the good information will be served with all the speed and amenities of the web to those who can afford it. Having other means of disseminating the information is irrelevant, because the real money will come from the paywalled sites. It's the JSTOR model, now for all the information.

And what I'm saying is not "let's keep the current model"; all I want is to urge the anti-ad advocates to at least acknowledge the issue -which is real- instead of brushing it off as only affecting Buzzfeed and the likes, and to come up with a better answer than "manufacturers will still publish their product data", as if that covered the important information we're talking about.