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

421–430 of 580 posts

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

#421

Post by jonahx »

lsc wrote: post #411
jonahx wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear this argument a lot, and since you seem sincere in making it I have a serious question. I'd honestly like to hear the answer from you or anyone who agrees with your sentiment. Is it also important to be accepting of those who think black people should never marry white people? What about those who think black people shouldn't have the right reproduce? Or live in the same neighborhoods as white people? Or live?…

Let's use an example I face every day. I work in an industry that by in large doesn't hire women or black people. So yes, I'm around people who are very racist and very sexist every day - It's pretty fucking important for me to be able to function socially around people who have political views I consider to be abhorrent - people who act on those beliefs every day. Would a better course of action be for me to leave t…

Thanks for answering. The point you're bringing up -- the value of being able to function in a world among people with a wide variety of beliefs that conflict with yours when you have no choice and not much power to effect change -- is totally valid. I thought you were extrapolating from that to argue that we shouldn't take action when we can. In the case of Eich, the power happened to be social pressure, and it was used to oust him. I'm not crazy about the tactics, and such tactics can be abused, but the result in this case is that it's now known that at Mozilla, at least, homophobia isn't tolerated. I thought you were arguing against that result on the grounds that people should have had more "tolerance for diversity of thought," namely the thought that gay people shoudn't have full marriage equality, with a political action to support it. My entire response was based on that premise. If it was a misreading of your intent, I apologize.

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

#422

Post by nugget »

amorphid wrote: post #262
mozumder wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I don't understand this argument. How are ads "manipulating" you? They're just ads. They're not an argumentative authority figure with a gun. The only reason to block ads is because of speed of user experience. The "manipulation" argument is the weakest reason to block ads. In any case, you manipulate other people for your own perso…

I am affected by my environment. Aren't you? A page full of ads for things that tend to make me feel slightly less optimal is, well, suboptimal.

In the absence of ads-that-are-obviously-ads don't you think that clever marketers would just migrate to native ads disguised as content? There's something to be said for a clear line of separation between ads and content. It seems naive to think that the concept of ''advertising'' would ever be eliminated full stop, given how human nature works.

You might enjoy this read, which an MD friend of mine sent to me the other day:

http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/02/17/pharma-virumque/

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

#423

Post by Zarel »

BrendanEich wrote: post #141
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…

I get your point, and it is a good one. We have a micro payments channel to publishers, frictionless and anonymous, under construction, for folks who want no ads and who will pay. Other users than you will be able to mix and match, too: better and more private ads on sites they don't support, with a revenue share to these users that they can spend on sites they do. We aren't saying "only ads". We do see ads as a nece…

I hope you don't really mean "replace" ads.

The ad-supported Internet is one of the few places where wealthy people and poor people are on equal footing, where children can still explore without parental permission, and adults can explore without constantly asking themselves "is this worth it?".

I imagine micropayments will be exactly the sort of problem people decry in Facebook's Free Basics, where large companies can afford to give access to their sites for free, while small website operators are forced to live in their walled garden or charge micropayments (and fade into obscurity).

I also think it's kind of weird how many people like the idea of micropayments for websites when we've seen firsthand what it did to gaming, and especially mobile gaming.

I too am hopeful for a better system that can replace advertising, but I don't think micropayments are that system.

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

#424

Post by caskance »

pdkl95 wrote: post #414
caskance wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the reality, which is neither of those: people don't become properly informed when you present them with unprompted information. They ignore your pitch and move on with their life. You never reach the state where there are "properly informed" people deciding not to buy your product.

> unprompted That's the problem. > They ignore your pitch Of course they do. An unprompted pitch is at best an annoyance and at worst some kind of scam. Why would you expect it to be well received after you wasted their time and energy? > You never reach the state where there are "properly informed" people deciding not to buy your product. Sure you do. It's why people pay for things like Consumer Reports - so they ca…

And Consumer Reports reaches about 7 million US households. Out of over 110 million. That's quite the definition of "most" you've got there.

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

#425

Post by bufordsharkley »

oldmanjay wrote: post #340
dota_fanatic wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manipulation, yes. Unethical, maybe? (when you look at its effect in aggregate) Honestly I just want all the advertising (be it physical (signage, billboards, smells, etc) or digital) to get out of my environment. It's almost always noise and it's ugly. There's no reason we couldn't build a hyper-connected system where if I'm looking for something, I can find it. I want socks? Ok, how many sock stores are local? Ok,…

I'm not sure where you live, but your desires are incompatible with free speech. Frankly, they're so extreme, I can't imagine you could be happy as anything other than a hermit. I certainly wouldn't be quiet in your presence just because you don't want to hear me.

Two follow-up questions:

1) Is it free speech to blow an airhorn on a continuous basis?

2) Is it free speech to spraypaint over a billboard?

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

#426

Post by bufordsharkley »

dota_fanatic wrote: post #274
philh wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I want to buy a card, I go to a shop named Cards Galore. I go there because the name makes me think that they sell cards. I know it exists because I pass it every day, and they have their name in big letters on the outside of their shop. Do you consider that I've been manipulated? More to the point, do you find anything unethical in this?

Manipulation, yes. Unethical, maybe? (when you look at its effect in aggregate) Honestly I just want all the advertising (be it physical (signage, billboards, smells, etc) or digital) to get out of my environment. It's almost always noise and it's ugly. There's no reason we couldn't build a hyper-connected system where if I'm looking for something, I can find it. I want socks? Ok, how many sock stores are local? Ok,…

A concept that has crossed my mind: an Anti-advertising League. Businesses can opt in to a directory containing information on their products and services (including reviews, etc), with the stipulation that they will never advertise.

You'd expect the directory to be filled with businesses that effectively advertise themselves.

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

#427

Post by jldugger »

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…

> Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe it would be?

It kind of would. Google, Facebook, Yahoo, etc. are all funded by selling ads. There's a few experiments with buying out ads, but when the current price is "free," any increase in price of these services to users is a huge increase in price with an expected equivalent decrease in users.

As a fellow AdBlock user, we have a huge problem to reconcile: the sites we use by and large don't exist without someone clicking on ads. The Categorical Imperative Adblock would block not only the ads, but the website delivering them as well.

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

#428

Post by pdkl95 »

caskance wrote: post #424
pdkl95 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unprompted That's the problem. > They ignore your pitch Of course they do. An unprompted pitch is at best an annoyance and at worst some kind of scam. Why would you expect it to be well received after you wasted their time and energy? > You never reach the state where there are "properly informed" people deciding not to buy your product. Sure you do. It's why people pay for things like Consumer Reports - so they ca…

And Consumer Reports reaches about 7 million US households. Out of over 110 million. That's quite the definition of "most" you've got there.

    > things like Consumer Reports
             ^^^^
If it wasn't clear, that was only one example. Every reviewer, search engine, friend-who-already-bought-one, and so on is a resource available to get information.

This is, however, straying from my point, which was: just because people aren't informed about your particular product doesn't give make it ok to try to trick them into buying your product with manipulative advertising, and throwing your pitch at someone unsolicited is still (at best) rude.

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

#429

Post by [deleted] »

VLM wrote: post #271
coldpie wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why else would one oppose marriage equality?

For better or worse (mostly the latter) we pretend to have separation of church and state, but certainly do not. Being reminded of this, manages to deeply offend many people on both sides. If we don't talk about it, its not a problem, right? (LOL) So, like it or not, government marriage = Christian marriage and Christians are going to be really offended at the government redefinition of their religious institution. J…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN