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

The End of the Ad-Supported Web

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 74 posts

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#31

Post by yayana »

orev wrote: post #7
baal80spam wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's nothing wrong with an ad supported web I very much disagree with this statement. I simply can't stand ads in my internet and uBlock Origin is the first thing I install in a fresh browser. I can't fathom browsing the web without it anymore.

The point is that the reason you feel the need to immediately block ads is because of how they have been abused and pushed to further and further absurdity over the years.

I don't know that is true, I spend more than half my time on resources similar to (sometimes even from) the pre-commercial Internet. The existence of the Ad driven Internet is disruptive even if it were pretty benign simply because it has money and it wants all the engagement.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#32

Post by keithnz »

The irony of the articles website asking to turn off adblocker :)

I'm not sure what a non ad supported web would look like.

I'm fairly sure my local newspapers would collapse. They are drastically shrinking already. Seems hard to make a buck in journalism these days.

we also hate "paywalls", we expect everything available for free and, the more tech savvy, are more than happy to block the ads with adblockers.

While I agree that the web is warped by ads, and it's getting absolutely nuts what can be tracked about people.... What are viable models? Do we try and regulate this and see what happens? Nothing sounds too promising, other than trying to regulate advertising itself ( which also feels like a crappy tool for the problem )

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#33

Post by kodablah »

baal80spam wrote: post #5
PlutoIsAPlanet wrote: post #3

Ad companies got caught putting their hand in the cookie jar and people have had enough. There's nothing wrong with an ad supported web, but it got abused, with tracking going too far and ad companies constantly trying to defeat privacy-protecting features. They have no one to blame but themselves.

> There's nothing wrong with an ad supported web I very much disagree with this statement. I simply can't stand ads in my internet and uBlock Origin is the first thing I install in a fresh browser. I can't fathom browsing the web without it anymore.

I don't see how what you personally can't stand has anything to do with there being nothing wrong with it existing. It's like me saying I very much disagree with a statement saying there's nothing wrong with a beet-supported farm. Maybe there is something wrong with an ad supported web, but a better argument can be made.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#34

Post by matt4077 »

akvadrako wrote: post #22
orev wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that the reason you feel the need to immediately block ads is because of how they have been abused and pushed to further and further absurdity over the years.

That may be the point, but it's wrong. Advertising is manipulative and causes people to make bad decisions. It shouldn't be allowed at all.

Advertisement is a required feature of a market-based economy, because it (also) informes consumers of the choices available.

Without ads, the chances of breaking into an established market are extremely low.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#35

Post by H1Supreme »

akvadrako wrote: post #22
orev wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that the reason you feel the need to immediately block ads is because of how they have been abused and pushed to further and further absurdity over the years.

That may be the point, but it's wrong. Advertising is manipulative and causes people to make bad decisions. It shouldn't be allowed at all.

> Advertising is manipulative and causes people to make bad decisions.

Not all advertising is some evil plot to brainwash the public. At it's core, it's a way to let the public know about your product. In the correct context, it's beneficial to the consumer.

My Grandpa used to subscribe to Hemmings Motor News. It's a magazine that is focused on restoring vintage cars. It has regular ads, and a pretty large classified section. He used that magazine, including the ads, as a resource for vehicle restoration.

Ads selling parts for 1940's Chevy pickup trucks in a section of a magazine specifically catering to that audience make sense. They're beneficial to people in the market for those products.

I agree that web sites or real sites (eg. Times Square) that simply bombard you with anything and everything are awful. But, you can't put all advertising under one umbrella.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#36

Post by spullara »

amelius wrote: post #16
PlutoIsAPlanet wrote: post #3

Ad companies got caught putting their hand in the cookie jar and people have had enough. There's nothing wrong with an ad supported web, but it got abused, with tracking going too far and ad companies constantly trying to defeat privacy-protecting features. They have no one to blame but themselves.

> There's nothing wrong with an ad supported web Keep in mind that ads are a very limited monetization scheme. For example, you can't even increase the price of your content and set it at a desired value.

That is basically how advertising works. You set the price and people pay to be next to the content. If you don't get the price you want, don't share the content. For people blindly putting a javascript tag on their page for google ads I would agree but you can bet that places like Techmeme and DaringFireball set their price.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#37

Post by beagle3 »

p1necone wrote: post #18
Animats wrote: post #15

Re the reference to Vectuary. Here's the decision:[1] They sell an add-on for apps which snoops on the user's location and sends it to them for advertising purposes. The French data privacy regulator said that required Vecturary to get explicit user consent. But Vectuary has no customer interaction of their own. They claimed to rely on some chain of consent from some other party, but couldn't prove they actually had…

Surely Vectuary just needs the apps of their clients to ask for consent from their users?

“Just”?

It must be opt-in, not opt-out. The exact use must be properly described. Consent may be revoked at any time, and all copies of data retrieved or deleted by customer request.

It is more likely the apps would drop Vectuary than deal with that.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#38

Post by matt4077 »

keithnz wrote: post #32

The irony of the articles website asking to turn off adblocker :) I'm not sure what a non ad supported web would look like. I'm fairly sure my local newspapers would collapse. They are drastically shrinking already. Seems hard to make a buck in journalism these days. we also hate "paywalls", we expect everything available for free and, the more tech savvy, are more than happy to block the ads with adblockers. While I…

It seems like most people are deeply cynical now, as in “all politicians are corrupt, anyway”, “journalists are corrupt/incompetent”, etc.

Or, at least, that’s how they justify running every last publisher into the ground for reasons as spacious as “they are intruding on my rights by loading this unnesseray JS library”.

Once all medium-sized papers are gone (i. e. soon) it will probably get worse, then downhill from there, and over the cliff beyond that.

But at least we won’t have to deal with those distracting ads. Or only in the 30 minutes per day that the power is on.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#39

Post by product50 »

No ad supported web means a paid web. I am not sure if that is what the users want either. I have seen even in HN where people post alternate links of a site blocked by paywall to let users access the content for free. And this paid channel means every content site (such as Medium, NYT, WSJ, WaPo etc.) will have to institute their own paid mechanism which will cost users a lot of money. Pick your pill - you can't have it both ways.

Re: The End of the Ad-Supported Web

#40

Post by [deleted] »

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #27
geocar wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who do you think should sponsor the creation of arts and the publication of news? I'd be okay with increasing taxes to cover it, or using a UK-style TV license (Internet Publishing License anyone?) and requiring people seek "Internet commissioners" like we have for Television[1], [2]. [1]: http://www.pbs.org/about/producing-pbs/proposal-process/ [2]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/commissioning Another option is micropayments…

Why do we need a funding model for arts or news publication? For example, most of the artistic content I consume (aside from cinema) originates from people who self-publish online (blogs, articles, podcasts) and do not involve advertising nor ask for donations in the delivery of the content. Those people like creating and delivering content to others for free. They are happy to lose their own money in exchange for th…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN