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

Cunningham's Law

meta.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: Cunningham's Law

#61

Post by verisimi »

codlaw wrote: post #26
kerkeslager wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I just don't understand people who don't use ad blocking[1]. You just wrote a whole post analyzing how you are being manipulated, causing you to feel "uneasy", "impatient", so that you almost do things that are "awful and tedious". Why do people live like this? [1] You can block ads in mobile games with a proxy that takes less than a minute to set up, at least on Android.

Thanks for sharing what you know. I believe with a little bit more empathy, you have so much to give to make the world a better place, if you don't mind. Therefore, including what the parent and the others have already mentioned, I would like to suggest these perspectives: • maybe not everyone is aware of the ease of setting up ad blocking as you described • maybe not everyone is on a platform where this is feasible…

bleurgh

Re: Cunningham's Law

#62

Post by numlock86 »

ineedasername wrote: post #3

A sort of interesting "corollary" to this is something I've noticed in mobile games with in-app ads for other mobile games: The best way to attract a player isn't by showing them someone playing well, it's by showing them someone playing very bad Because these ads show demo play (usually of puzzles) where the player is making obviously bad decisions, and watching it is sort of like seeing a dozen objects in a row, bu…

It's not just ads. It's the same on every media and knowledge domain these days. For example look up some short tech reviews or tips on TikTok, Instagram or even YouTube. They make blatant errors that are so bad you might think "This causes more harm than help!?" but as it turns out: That's how you get "community interaction" (money). People will follow your content just to tell you what's wrong with it as soon as you output more of it and hence cause engagement. For the same reason most influential anti vaxxers are in fact actually vaccinated.

Re: Cunningham's Law

#63

Post by ljm »

Arnavion wrote: post #18
ineedasername wrote: post #3

A sort of interesting "corollary" to this is something I've noticed in mobile games with in-app ads for other mobile games: The best way to attract a player isn't by showing them someone playing well, it's by showing them someone playing very bad Because these ads show demo play (usually of puzzles) where the player is making obviously bad decisions, and watching it is sort of like seeing a dozen objects in a row, bu…

Same principle applies to Let's-Players on Youtube / Twitch that play new games "non-optimally". In their comment sections you'll see people commenting about how they bought the game just to be able to play it correctly themselves, to prove to the streamer and themselves that their strategy is better.

I actually prefer that sometimes, but it's because it shows me a bit more what the game is like if you get the unedited feed. But that's also because I'm not really interested in one-upping random people on the internet, it just feels like it shows more of the stuff that might be edited out on Youtube.

I guess the analogy is the old joke/meme about the O'Reilly Javascript book, and the JS The Good Parts book sat next to it.

Re: Cunningham's Law

#64

Post by wyldfire »

bricemo wrote: post #35

I have started saying aloud “Someone on the internet is saying something I disagree with, and it’s making me upset”. I say this whenever I notice it happening. It immediately makes me realize how silly it is for this to take up my time, and frees me to let go and move on.

https://xkcd.com/386/

Re: Cunningham's Law

#65

Post by waffle_maniac »

dang wrote: post #39

Please don't editorialize titles. It's against the site guidelines: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html (Submitted title was "Someone Is Wrong on the Internet".)

No post body was provided.

Re: Cunningham's Law

#66

Post by kerkeslager »

codlaw wrote: post #26
kerkeslager wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I just don't understand people who don't use ad blocking[1]. You just wrote a whole post analyzing how you are being manipulated, causing you to feel "uneasy", "impatient", so that you almost do things that are "awful and tedious". Why do people live like this? [1] You can block ads in mobile games with a proxy that takes less than a minute to set up, at least on Android.

Thanks for sharing what you know. I believe with a little bit more empathy, you have so much to give to make the world a better place, if you don't mind. Therefore, including what the parent and the others have already mentioned, I would like to suggest these perspectives: • maybe not everyone is aware of the ease of setting up ad blocking as you described • maybe not everyone is on a platform where this is feasible…

> maybe not everyone is aware of the ease of setting up ad blocking as you described

Well, now you know.

> maybe not everyone is on a platform where this is feasible -> you provided an example on Android, which implicitly means it is different or more difficult on other platforms

This is just as doable on Iphone, I just Googled it. Though perhaps people aren't aware of the ease of Googling things as I described.

> maybe someone is using a restricted device provided for work

This is in the context of ads seen in mobile games, so...

> maybe experiencing what many others are experiencing is intended. e.g. due to work reasons as creakingstairs suggested, or due to personal fulfillment

You're accusing me of not empathizing with purely hypothetical possibilities which support your worldview, but you're not empathizing with what someone actually said. Does the word "uneasy" or the word "impatient" suggest "personal fulfillment" to you?

> maybe someone values the time spent on writing "a whole post analyzing" the situation more than setting up any modification

I'm not criticizing the choice to write the post--that I get. I'm criticizing the choice to view ads, which is inherently harmful to people's mental health.

> maybe not everyone or no one is exactly Homo economicus

I'd go so far as to say that nobody is Homo economicus--I'm not sure what I said that would lead you to believe I think that. I do believe that with a bit of knowledge, people can take steps to protect themselves from advertising.

Re: Cunningham's Law

#67

Post by kerkeslager »

creakingstairs wrote: post #15
kerkeslager wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I just don't understand people who don't use ad blocking[1]. You just wrote a whole post analyzing how you are being manipulated, causing you to feel "uneasy", "impatient", so that you almost do things that are "awful and tedious". Why do people live like this? [1] You can block ads in mobile games with a proxy that takes less than a minute to set up, at least on Android.

I try to not use ad blocks for my work chrome profile so I understand what my users are experiencing. It is depressing to see what normal users go through in their daily lives and I hope at least I can alleviate some of frustration in the apps I work on.

While I laud your empathy for your users, I think that you can improve user experience more effectively by refusing to work on apps that insist on invading their users' headspace with ads. I made the decision to not work on anything that got its money primarily from advertising early on in my career, and I have no regrets. It hasn't hurt my career at all: if anything, my friends who work for ad companies often end up in bad situations because such companies tend to have thinner profit margin than companies with an actual product that people are willing to pay for.

Re: Cunningham's Law

#68

Post by kerkeslager »

dylan604 wrote: post #22
ineedasername wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware you could block in-app ads. (Thanks for the heads-up!) That may be a primary reason that many don't block these ads. Browser adblockers are relatively well known, and relatively popular, but I don't think that's true of blocking in-app ads. For in-app, there's also the tech hurdle. Now that I know there's a method, I'm tech savvy enough to search it out an implement it, but there's going to be a much h…

Many games will allow users to do something advantageous by watching an ad. If they are blocked, then this will not work. I've seen these fail when the device cannot connect to the network or other causes of timeouts, but they are smart enough to know this and not give you the reward.

So don't play those games?

Re: Cunningham's Law

#69

Post by kerkeslager »

stdbrouw wrote: post #56
kerkeslager wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I just don't understand people who don't use ad blocking[1]. You just wrote a whole post analyzing how you are being manipulated, causing you to feel "uneasy", "impatient", so that you almost do things that are "awful and tedious". Why do people live like this? [1] You can block ads in mobile games with a proxy that takes less than a minute to set up, at least on Android.

I may not like the ads, but I like that they pay for a lot of cool stuff on the web that otherwise would not see the light of day.

I disagree. Lots of cool stuff existed before advertisers took over the internet, and it was allowed to be a lot weirder and less clickbait-y because they didn't have to appease everyone or constantly be driving for more views. In fact, a lot of this was funded out of people's own pockets, at a financial loss, because they wanted other people to see it or use it. With search engine optimized ad-delivery platforms dominating the front pages of search results, these people don't see the encouragement from users they used to see, and have died off. In the rare cases where people are still doing this stuff, they're much harder to find.

In short, advertising has killed a lot more, and a lot better, than it has funded.

Post reply on HN