Just doesn’t feel good • Hacker News Board

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#291

Post by Khaine » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 3:36 AM UTC

s73v3r wrote: post #152

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.

No, that is a cop out and a rationalization for why you feel you're entitled to stuff for free.

Sites like eBay hosted malvertising (http://motherboard.vice.com/en_uk/read/ads-on-ebay-and-drudg...) for 3 weeks. 3 fking weeks!!

This is unacceptable. Simply visiting a website with ads poses a threat to the security of your devices. Until ad networks and publishers fix this, they can go fk themselves. I will block ads to protect my devices.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#292

Post by dombili » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 4:05 AM UTC

kaolinite wrote: post #244

publicfig wrote: post #84

I'm really disappointed by the amount of support he has gotten for this. He has directly mislead consumers into buying a product with an intent of support, and then immediately pulls it and forces the user into a difficult process with Apple to reclaim that money. Anyone that is unsuccessful in the process will have their money go directly to the developer. I understand the possibility change of heart, but that doesn…

I think you're forgetting the fact that this application still works. Sure, when iOS 10 is released it may break - but the same could be said for any now-abandoned app. It's a shame but he gave people notice (instead of just stopping development) and recommended people request refunds. This is nowhere close to being a scam.

While that's true, keep in mind that not everyone who bought Peace know who Marco Arment is. I don't even think he released the app using his name.

Customers who bought the app only because it was the top app in the App Store at the time have no way of knowing the developer stopped supporting the app. They're screwed in the long term because they'll think they're using an ad blocker when they don't.

I think the smart way to go about this would have been to make the app free and let users know via the interface that the app will no longer be updated and users should ask for refunds. I realize this could make the app even more popular since you make it free, but I think this is still a better way to let users know about the future development of the app.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#293

Post by newscracker » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 6:29 AM UTC

makeitsuckless wrote: post #165

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 just visited Ars Technica without the usual self-protection. I get greeted by a salvo of dozens of third part trackers from the likes of Doubleclick & co. Ars Technica operates as maliciously as any other publisher. There's no "careful consideration here", just blatant disrespect for the privacy of their public.

I had tried Ars without ad blocking quite a while ago when it had a banner that detected ad blockers and displayed a message. I found lots of third party trackers and decided to turn ad blocking on again. Even if the UI has improved with the ads in the recent times, the UX and privacy concerns are quite bad.

I don't subscribe to Ars for a few different reasons. My visits to the site have reduced drastically in the last couple of years (just a few times a month) and it's quite expensive for me. If Ars stopped using those trackers and also dropped the subscription price even by 50%, I would consider subscribing. I don't know if buying a subscription only turns off ads while keeping the trackers on (for an overly broadly termed reason called "analytics"). That would be practically useless for a reader like me.

Frankly, I believe Ars (and other sites) could make more money than they are now by reducing the prices and letting in more people from various backgrounds and geographies (currency conversion rates and all). Being one of the better tech sites, Ars could also be a good role model if it eliminated all those third party trackers (no clue what influence its owner, Condé Naste, has over such things).

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#294

Post by newscracker » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 7:01 AM UTC

carlosrg wrote: post #34

DanBlake wrote: post #2

Although I have no direct knowledge, it feels like there is something going on behind the scenes forcing this reaction. If I had to guess, I would point the finger at Ghostery causing this. Lifehacker wrote¹ that Ghostery sells some data to marketers, so perhaps the approach taken with the app interferes with Ghostery's model and they were not willing to continue allowing access to their rule list. Alternatively Ghos…

Doubt it. He probably just thought the app wasn't going to be so popular. He's selling a lot of copies and he just doesn't feel comfortable with it. Hats off to Marco for putting his ethics first, not the money. I said this yesterday and I'm going to repeat myself in this thread: adblocking is not going to "fix" the web as people are saying, for the simple reason ad blockers block all ads, not only annoying ones. The…

What stops the small blogger from trying to understand why ad revenues are falling and also writing a post asking readers how things can be improved? Readers who like the content will respond, and hopefully, a better ad network could be used and/or other monetization avenues could be considered.

Marco has tweeted that he's giving the Peace app code to Ghostery. [1] That can't be considered ethical. That's like being a gunmaker, not feeling comfortable being one, pulling the product from the shelves, and still giving/selling the entire design, patents, manufacturing facilities, etc., to someone else to continue making it and selling it. In this case, even though Ghostery has had its block list and desktop browser extensions for quite sometime, it surely does not need Marco to give away the app's code to it, especially if he had a moral quandary about having made such an app.

[1]: https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/644939796624896000

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#295

Post by untangle » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 7:39 AM UTC

I have no idea what he intended, but what he created by this reversal was news.

That the move adds a martyrdom flavor to an already-rich personal brand is a bankable asset beyond the $100K (or whatever) that would be made in the App Store. This is a 60 Minutes or GMA-level story now.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#296

Post by endymi0n » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 7:51 AM UTC

There seems to be quite some confusion around "tracking" and "tasteful" ads. Reality is, "tastefulness" is mostly a personal feeling based on relevance to the user which usually is a direct consequence of tracking (and taking the right action on it). I'm not talking about intrusiveness, which is a whole different UX issue and the only thing I think we all agree on.

But from all my experience in AdTech I don't think there's a single ads provider that "does not track", as it's basically the same as having a store that does not have a cashier's desk. "We don't track" is simply a big lie.

But tracking isn't black and white. At least, networks will track impressions and clicks, otherwise publishers won't get paid. But then there's Cookies. Advertising IDs. Audiences. You can even break it down on the individual user level. The biggest problem is simply responsibility and where to stop. Most large ad networks enforce responsibility by mandating minimum sized audiences by now, but with RTB it's possible to break down the last barriers.

The ecosystem is mostly based on trust in the advertisers right now and only the worst offenders get pulled, but mostly after the fact.

Marco made a good choice by not even trying to be judge, police and policymaker in the same person. It's an impossible task to begin with.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#297

Post by neoschiller » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 10:26 AM UTC

Ad Blocking should be illegal, this is like stealing money from people who work on creating content, I believe that people will leave content providers who serve too many ads in an intrusive way anyway. so there is a balance in place already.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#298

Post by davidcollantes » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 11:31 AM UTC

stock_toaster wrote: post #221

ChrisLTD wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My refund was processed immediately.

Mine has not been processed yet, but it has only been a few hours.

The app is still listed under recent, which will not give me the option to ask for a reimbursement. Unsupported new app should be sufficient reason.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#299

Post by kardos » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 11:35 AM UTC

neoschiller wrote: post #297

Ad Blocking should be illegal, this is like stealing money from people who work on creating content, I believe that people will leave content providers who serve too many ads in an intrusive way anyway. so there is a balance in place already.

Why does it have to be so black and white? What we need is an optional micropayment system such that I can pay 1-2 cents per article in lieu of seeing ads. Choice one, see the article in an ad-infested page, or choice two, pay a couple cents to "buy out" the ad experience.

Ad rates are on the order of $5 per 1000 views, ie, 0.5 cents, so a 2 cent buyout is entirely feasible.

Re: Just doesn’t feel good

#300

Post by chmaynard » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 2:37 PM UTC

This is really sad. Arment has made an impulsive, flakey decision that tarnishes his reputation as one of the leading independent iOS developers. Instead of removing Peace from the App Store, Arment could choose to improve and refine the app, satisfying his own objections and encouraging his customers to follow his lead.