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

Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 580 posts

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#281

Post by chris_wot »

lossolo wrote: post #195

You all are forgetting one thing. Without ads google would not exist, without ads facebook couldn't exist and expand, make research. If everybody will block ads then you will see decline in free sites.

I've never cared about Google ads because they are totally unobtrusive. In fact, I actually have clicked on a Google ad at least a few times in the past.

On the other hand, I have literally never clicked on a non-text ad on a browser, except accidentally due to some sort of dark patterns.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#282

Post by acheron »

webjprgm wrote: post #194

A few thoughts: (1) If they block tracking, does it block Google Analytics? Because that would annoy me as a website owner. (2) The reason I don't pay subscriptions to sites like Wall Street Journal and NY Times is that I get my content from aggregators like Hacker News so I only go to one of those paid sites if I follow an occasional link. Micropayments would fix that if I could pay one company a $5/mo subscription…

If they block tracking, does it block Google Analytics?

That's one of the biggest trackers out there, so it would be a pretty poor blocker if it didn't.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#283

Post by chris_wot »

whyagaindavid wrote: post #224
chris_wot wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll probably use your browser so that I can read the Sydney Morning Herald. That's one crappy, crappy website - and only because of the ridiculous level of tracking. Case in point - I connected to smh.com.au and since I have connected to it yesterday (only two times!) it has accessed 91 third party sites. 91! It's ridiculous.

Try white listing only the "content delivering server from smh". You will browse blazing fast! https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tobykurien... https://github.com/tobykurien/WebApps PS: I am not the author, I like the idea, so I have a complete white list of sites in the webview.

I'll give that a try! Thanks.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#284

Post by caskance »

lbotos wrote: post #149
jhall1468 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on your definition of manipulation. Most people consider manipulation to be unfair or unscrupulous. Knowing a motto or the name of a brand is hardly either. I also happen to know what "get serious about social" refers to even though I've never seen an ad by them, nor have I ever been in a position which would make me a customer. There's nothing "sneaky" advertising techniques. They are well-known.

I know my argument stands on shakey ground, but brand awareness (what you define as knowing a motto or brand name) is absolutely a form of manipulation. Apple has enough money, to buy enough ads, to be in enough places, that they can get their message to the masses. "Pear computers" (an imaginary computer startup who makes hardware better than apple but has no money) who don't have the power (money) to make that camp…

Brand awareness is the most important part of apple's product. "Better hardware"? Nobody cares.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#285

Post by Nadya »

imtringued wrote: post #226
stonogo wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freeloading? You're missing the point; we're not catering to your sense of entitlement.

So where is your magical solution that puts food on the table of the content creators but doesn't rely on selling user data or displaying ads?

Where is the magical solution that puts food on my table for the art I create?

I'm entitled to survive off the art I'm creating after all. Everyone should be paying me for making art. Regardless if it is of good or poor quality. I made it - thus people should be paying me!

Does that argument sound absurd to you? It should.

If people aren't willing to pay you for your art (or "journalism" as is often the case) then guess what? You aren't entitled to their money. Stop making art/journalism and find a better career. If people really value your journalism (or simply "journalism at all") they'll pay for it to be around.

If nobody is paying - nobody gives a shit. Content creators don't get some free pass to do as they want and expect to get paid for it. If they aren't producing work worth paying for - guess what? That's their problem not anyone else's problem.

E:

Figurative third person use of "your" and "you", for clarification of the usage.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#286

Post by Nursie »

jacquesm wrote: post #22
Nursie wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think it's very healthy and marks the beginning of the next stage of the web - how does it work in a post-advertising world?

If the various stages of the arms race have been any indication so far it tends to get worse rather than better with every stage so far, which does not lead me to believe there will be a 'post advertising world', only a 'more annoying and harder to get rid of / ignore advertising world'.

Well it's true, it has been an arms race, but until recently it's been between relatively small numbers of blockers and the advertisers.

Now that Apple have taken it more mainstream it's going to be interesting to watch what happens.

But you might be right, sadly. More of the same and worse...

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#287

Post by mrtron »

nileshtrivedi wrote: post #87
mrtron wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paying to browse, a terrible idea that has been tried before. Alladvantage.com raised about 200m on that idea. The wikipedia page isn't correct, they had a pyramid based payout system. Fraudulent users would create enormous numbers of fake users under them and simulate all of their browsing.

In existing model of advertising too, it's possible to fake ad-clicks and cost your competitors a lot of money.

Agree - fraud is rampant in the current ad marketplace as well. Both with fake ad-clicks and malicious installs.

Facebook, twitter and other native ads/sponsored posts are the cleanest ads.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#288

Post by caskance »

nitrogen wrote: post #275
mille562 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are people with needs and people with solutions. I understand where you are coming from, but advertising a solution to people that may have that need is not always evil. There are many times where I am glad I saw advertising: my favorite band is coming to town, a new product that will save me hours a day just got released, the shoes I have been looking for are being sold at 30% off. I don't want to give up all…

Information like "products X, Y, and Z from these manufacturers now solve these problems" or "band Q is visiting your city soon" can be presented in a non-manipulative manner, but current ads go beyond information into manipulation using emotion, repetition, ear worms, and social pressure.

If information by itself worked, I can guarantee you nobody would waste time using all these other techniques.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#289

Post by sputr »

jordigh wrote: post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

That's the exact case I just tried to make in a blog[1] yesterday. Ads are a BAD solution to the problem of financing content creation. There are business models out there, not fringe ones, but big examples, where free content with volunteer fan donations WORK. Ads were a quick fix, but if we want content created for consumers, money will have to come from consumers directly.

Yes, these models can't yet support a creator by themselves, but the share has been getting better and there has been a quite noticeable effect on content.

[1] http://thescepticalpirate.eu/adblock-destroying-ads-good/

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#290

Post by vectorpush »

LordKano wrote: post #268
coldpie wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, no, don't try to rewrite history. The attacks were directed at gay people. Quoting this article: Early on, Prop 8’s supporters decided to focus their campaign primarily on children, stoking parents’ fears about gay people brainwashing their kids with pro-gay messages or, implicitly, turning their children gay. Another notorious commercial shows an earnest school administrator fretting that a “new health curriculu…

I'm rewriting nothing. I have no dog in this fight. I'm not in California. I'm not gay. I'm not currently married. I am reminding people of a recently unpopular truth. Prop 8 only happened because of judicial activism on the issue. Notice that in states where the voters legalized same sex "marriage", there was no similar backlash.

> judicial activism

That's disingenuous bullshit. The spirit of the constitution protects individual rights, and there is no constitutional reason why an arbitrary religious definition of marriage should be respected over the rights of individuals. It's not activism to say that discrimination based on sexual orientation is unconstitutional. Any feelings you have about the definition of marriage based on culture, tradition, or god's divine law are irreverent to the legal institution of marriage established by our secular government.

Post reply on HN