Earlier quoted context omitted.
How soon will content makers make their content look like ads to force these algorithms to fail?
That's already happened ... just look at how many youtube channels have integrated a "and now let's briefly talk about my sponsors" segment in the middle.
The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
51–60 of 238 posts
Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#52Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#53> I have a good relationship with Godsey ... so I emailed him and asked if he could tell me the backstory, even if only off the record, just to satisfy my own curiosity. > “I’m not sure I want to deal with the can of worms it will open, so I’ll tell you privately,” he wrote back. And then the author published it. WTF? They won't have a good relationship now!
They clarify later on that Godsey changed his mind and allowed the author to publish it.
Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#54How soon until we see AI-powered adblockers that filter the output of any signal to remove anything that it perceives as an ad?
Auto flagging ads is pretty good, but even don't bother, just using kodi as a front end with the plugin and skipping forward 3 minutes when an ad comes on does most of the job. (sometimes you do another 30 seconds or 1 minute and you get really good at it).
Start watching your program 10-20 minutes late and no ads.
Live sport is the only place I see tv ads at all nowadays - hence the crush and cram maybe?
Everything you do to avoid ads, from blocking your ears, to ripping out magazine pages, running myth or equivalent, pi hole and similar adblockers must be made explicitly completely legal on the grounds of self-defence and proper care of your family. Regardless of the legality it's kind of your ethical duty.
Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
My moral belief is that being blasted with blinding amounts of light amounts to trespass and/or assault, and fully justifies a forceful response against the source of aggression (namely, the billboard). Obviously this is not going to be accepted as a legal argument, but if I'm not worried about the legal repercussions, I feel more than justified in taking matters into my own hands - for example, by cutting power to f…
Would be pretty dank and cyberpunk if someone built an onion-service ADsassination market, where you could put bounties on ugly public-space ads and a decentralized network of spraypaint-drone operators could deface those ads to earn crypto.
Maybe book a time slot. If the light disappears in this time slot, you get the bounty.
Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#56Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#57Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#58Modern television is insufferable.
Modern television is, in my experience, on-demand, ad-free and of vastly higher quality than the crap I used to "surf channels" on for hours.
Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#59I hate advertising so much. I would ban it immediately if allowed. It makes society so much worse in every possible measure. http://jacek.zlydach.pl/blog/2019-07-31-ads-as-cancer.html
Re: The Bucks can’t wear cream uniforms because they interfere with digital ads
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
They clarify later on that Godsey changed his mind and allowed the author to publish it.
I don't understand why the author included the original reluctance, the entire part could have been replaced with "as I found out, it was for advertising. Here's the transcript of my zoom call..."