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

What we break when we fix ad blocking

tonyhaile.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 226 posts

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#51

Post by bittercynic »

munificent wrote: post #24
bittercynic wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think good content necessarily needs to be paid for. Much of the best content on the web is created as a hobby, with no attempt to monetize, like dr-iguana.com (and countless others.) Other awesome ad-free content is created to promote retail within the same company, like sparkfun.com. It seems to me the ease of monetization with ad-networks drive ultra-low quality content like about.com, though even I must a…

> I don't think good content necessarily needs to be paid for. Much of the best content on the web is created as a hobby, with no attempt to monetize, like dr-iguana.com (and countless others.) I felt that way for a long time. I am basically living that philosophy. My blog[1] has always been free to read and free from ads. I wrote a book[2], and you can read the entire thing online for free, again with no ads. Almost…

Wow, I hadn't considered it that way. Thank you for broadening my perspective on the matter. This puts services like Facebook in a much more positive light than the way I'd considered before.

I haven't seen "This is 40", but I personally know many poor people who drive very fancy new cars and spend on extravagant things, while simultaneously being overwhelmed by stress from lack of money. I haven't figured out how to understand that yet, but these are intelligent, rational people, who make monetary decisions that are impossible (so far) for me to understand.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#52

Post by [deleted] »

amelius wrote: post #50
JulianMorrison wrote: post #34

There is an alternative to adverts. Its real, it's here, it works. That alternative is Patreon. In the Patreon model, you can support the creator directly, and their ability to produce content scales with that support. It's like a subscription, except you allow anyone else to free ride. A Patreon supported site could run no ads at all and still make a stable income. It would no longer be fighting its readers to force…

It seems that in the Patreon model, the creator is the central element, and not the content itself. This seems a bit weird, because it is the content I'm after, not the artist. It may be nice for fans who will buy anything from a particular artist, even if it is worthless when considering just the content. Also, this seems a lot like "branding & marketing" version 2.0. I don't like branding. And I don't want to like…

[deleted]

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#53

Post by lazyjones »

jordigh wrote: post #4

I'm going to keep repeating this because everyone seems to frame the debate in the wrong terms. Ad blocking for me is not about speed or security. Those are just nice side effects. It is also not because I do not want to pay. I don't mind paying. It is because when I'm in the middle of something I do not want to be told to pay someone else for goods I do not need. I don't care how unobtrusive it is (well, if it's onl…

> It is because when I'm in the middle of something I do not want to be told to pay someone else for goods I do not need.

That's probably the most common reason. I doubt people actually click on annoying ads in significant numbers these days. Perhaps publishers could settle for tracking only, preferably server-side without 3rd parties involved, thereby removing the most common motivation for ad blocking? Tracking data could then be sold to e-commerce sites for retargeting based on reading habits. Everyone wins, especially if privacy-conscious users can opt out of this kind of tracking.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#54

Post by wrsh07 »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #20

This article assumes that advertisers can get more sophisticated than blockers - I don't agree. With good enough technology, any logo can be snipped out or scribbled over. Any inline, self hosted image can be recognized and removed. Perhaps in future, adblockers will comb through the text of pages and the frames of video and your hero will be drinking "soda" instead of . Heck, one of these days, I want ad blocking gl…

Times Square as one great shiny ... emptiness

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#55

Post by dublinben »

briffle wrote: post #37
giancarlostoro wrote: post #7

My issue is with advertisements that break web pages, or slow them down dramatically. Or even worse, take up real estate on my phone, and just plain break my mobile experience further. Sometimes I forget to install an adblocker whenever I do a fresh OS install and forget just how bad things can be without an adblocker (well really my biggest peeve is pop ups, just why are they still around?) and they get worse when s…

There is a sports related web site I often read (friends link to it from facebook, and other sites I visit).. When reading it on mobile, almost the entire page will load, then my whole phone (LG G4) freezes up completely for about 8 seconds, then a full page add appears over the screen. Sometimes the "X" is in the upper right, sometimes below, etc, and if you are off even the slightest amount, you get a new chrome ta…

I highly recommend uBlock in Firefox for Android. It works pretty much the same as on desktop, which is to say excellently.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#56

Post by thephyber »

hiou wrote: post #25

Ad blocking is interesting in that it shows what happens when something that probably should be regulated has not. And because of this the public trust has eroded and then the answer has become an arms race of ad blockers vs ads. Resulting in a downward spiral resulting in less quality content. The world of online advertising is a fantastic way to study the possible downsides of no regulations.

I don't think regulations are the only solution to this problem. I think content creators have been too greedy/hopeful while there is so very much competition and a _very_ low barrier to entry. They are nostalgic for the days of large newspaper advertising margins and the domination of peoples' attention by a single newspaper/magazine during a reading session that they don't understand how people use their product now.

Content creators are desperate for more revenue so they throw on another tracking pixel, another web ad placement, another sponsorship. None of this helps the fact that content on the web is a commodity and people value their time and attention span.

Large lawsuits against the ad networks for allowing malware infections and drive-by downloads would have had an effect, but unless regulation has real teeth, it's just a hindrance or a "cost of business" with no value added to the consumer.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#57

Post by mrsaint »

The irony is that the biggest player here, Google, was also the most aggressive in placing ads. I had the pleasure of working with various AdSense and DFP Specialists. Basically it was all about how and where to place ads in the most eye-catching ways, and as many as possible, without breaking AdSense rules. Bigger ads = usually better (in particular those large rectangles, yuck). Higher up the fold = better (funny enough the Google Search team later penalitzed you when you replaced your up-the-fold content with non-content ad stuff - which shows that there are Chinese walls separating various Google teams).

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#58

Post by JulianMorrison »

strayptr wrote: post #43
JulianMorrison wrote: post #34

There is an alternative to adverts. Its real, it's here, it works. That alternative is Patreon. In the Patreon model, you can support the creator directly, and their ability to produce content scales with that support. It's like a subscription, except you allow anyone else to free ride. A Patreon supported site could run no ads at all and still make a stable income. It would no longer be fighting its readers to force…

This might be true for individual creators, but ad revenue powers companies. Can Patreon do that? (It's still an important point for individuals though.)

Well, right now it's people.

But I see no reason the NYT or some such site couldn't fund itself the same way.

[Edit, posted in reply to the wrong person]

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#59

Post by ss64 »

I think a lot of the recent pushback against adverts is driven by video and specifically autoplaying video ads.

As an advertiser I might well be tempted to stop displaying video ads if I was convinced that a big proportion of users were blocking video but not text ads.

Sadly most blockers are all or nothing. Most users are not going to go to the trouble of whitelisting individual sites so a better middle ground would be global AD blocker settings:

Off - Block nothing Low - Block popups Medium - Block popups and video High - Block everything

If that was a common model it would encourage some reasonable behaviour on both sides.

Re: What we break when we fix ad blocking

#60

Post by jordigh »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #22
bradleyjg wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you had a plugin that simply blanked the entire page if it contained advertising you'd be acting in a principled fashion aligned with your preferences. As it is you want to have your cake and eat it too. It may be legal and technically possible, but isn't ethical. I'm reminded of the debates that raged on the internet when Napster was around. All the people downloading music strenuously claimed that the industry m…

People are, it's called Patreon. Which would be a good model, too, for "free but we need our salary paid" content.

There's also Google Contributor.

https://www.google.com/contributor/welcome/

I'd be fine with websites requiring a Google Contributor login for unlimited access.

Post reply on HN