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

German digital signage ban prompts confusion

avinteractive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 457 posts

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#61

Post by GekkePrutser »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #36
themoonisachees wrote: post #27

> This means out-of-home advertising displays at bus stops, train stations and in underpasses could still be operated according to invidis managing director Florian Rotberg. “Most contracts explicitly require outdoor advertising companies to operate backlit city light posters and screens well into the night to provide passengers with more security in the waiting area. Autumn will show whether and how the exemptions w…

It isn't the ads, really: They are realistically speaking of lighting in bus stops, underpasses, and train stations. Lighting in those areas, which tend to be dark or populated, helps folks feel safer. Taking away the ads makes these places darker, and I can understand not suddenly having nervous folks not take the bus or train. Though, I agree: They can get bent about the contracts. The proper response is to install…

Still, emitting light through a thick diffuser and a poster is not as efficient as just putting up a light.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#62

Post by potamic »

My city banned billboard advertising once. All of them digital and non-digital. It was fabulous and finally felt like a place to live. Sadly it did not last long and their revival only reinforced how refreshing their absence was. I think we do not realize the value of visual space and pay a heavy price when we decide to monetize it.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#63

Post by adrianN »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #36
themoonisachees wrote: post #27

> This means out-of-home advertising displays at bus stops, train stations and in underpasses could still be operated according to invidis managing director Florian Rotberg. “Most contracts explicitly require outdoor advertising companies to operate backlit city light posters and screens well into the night to provide passengers with more security in the waiting area. Autumn will show whether and how the exemptions w…

It isn't the ads, really: They are realistically speaking of lighting in bus stops, underpasses, and train stations. Lighting in those areas, which tend to be dark or populated, helps folks feel safer. Taking away the ads makes these places darker, and I can understand not suddenly having nervous folks not take the bus or train. Though, I agree: They can get bent about the contracts. The proper response is to install…

Those areas are explicitly excluded from this.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#64

Post by tpmx »

adrianN wrote: post #47
turing_complete wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot power a country with wind power alone. Even if you want to build wind turbines, you need nuclear, gas, or coal to back them up.

No, but you can power something like 70% of a country with wind power alone. Add in some solar and a few hours worth of storage and you can go 90+%. Add a few days of storage and you reach two nines. A few weeks for more nines.

"Add a few days of storage"

This is very non-trivial and will take decades longer than building nuclear power.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#65

Post by lm28469 »

malermeister wrote: post #53
Beltiras wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm quite sure brand advertisers will not concur.

And they can go fuck off if they don't. We're in a crisis and they want to waste energy we might need for heating households to manipulate people into buying shit they don't need? That's not exactly a position that'll get them a lot of sympathy.

> to manipulate people into buying shit they don't need?

This is encouraged by our system, switching off screens at night won't change it. Attack the root cause not the very last symptom

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#66

Post by Broken_Hippo »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #61
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't the ads, really: They are realistically speaking of lighting in bus stops, underpasses, and train stations. Lighting in those areas, which tend to be dark or populated, helps folks feel safer. Taking away the ads makes these places darker, and I can understand not suddenly having nervous folks not take the bus or train. Though, I agree: They can get bent about the contracts. The proper response is to install…

Still, emitting light through a thick diffuser and a poster is not as efficient as just putting up a light.

Agreed completely. As I said in the last bit: The proper solution is to put up proper lighting.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#67

Post by soco »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #36
themoonisachees wrote: post #27

> This means out-of-home advertising displays at bus stops, train stations and in underpasses could still be operated according to invidis managing director Florian Rotberg. “Most contracts explicitly require outdoor advertising companies to operate backlit city light posters and screens well into the night to provide passengers with more security in the waiting area. Autumn will show whether and how the exemptions w…

It isn't the ads, really: They are realistically speaking of lighting in bus stops, underpasses, and train stations. Lighting in those areas, which tend to be dark or populated, helps folks feel safer. Taking away the ads makes these places darker, and I can understand not suddenly having nervous folks not take the bus or train. Though, I agree: They can get bent about the contracts. The proper response is to install…

So basically the authorities outsourced a part of public safety to the ad companies?

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#68

Post by adrianN »

tpmx wrote: post #64
adrianN wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but you can power something like 70% of a country with wind power alone. Add in some solar and a few hours worth of storage and you can go 90+%. Add a few days of storage and you reach two nines. A few weeks for more nines.

"Add a few days of storage" This is very non-trivial and will take decades longer than building nuclear power.

Building enough nuclear power plants to power a country also takes decades and is very non-trivial. The quicker we reach 90% carbon-free, the more carbon budget we have left to figure out the remaining 10%. Renewables are the quickest, cheapest way to do that.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#69

Post by morsch »

phartenfeller wrote: post #32

Here in Germany, there was recently a leak in the news. It said that a single LED sign consumes as much energy as 10 single households[0]. Of course, the companies don't want to give any official information. That is pretty high for no real value for society in my opinion... [0] https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/technologie/led-reklame...

Average power usage for a 1 person household in Germany is 1300 kwh/year (roughly, numbers vary, but not to a degree that it matters).

That's about 150W sustained. So 1500W for a large sign, that's like 150 high power LED light bulbs, I guess that checks out.

Anything that reduces ads in the public sphere is fine by me.

Re: German digital signage ban prompts confusion

#70

Post by Broken_Hippo »

soco wrote: post #67
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't the ads, really: They are realistically speaking of lighting in bus stops, underpasses, and train stations. Lighting in those areas, which tend to be dark or populated, helps folks feel safer. Taking away the ads makes these places darker, and I can understand not suddenly having nervous folks not take the bus or train. Though, I agree: They can get bent about the contracts. The proper response is to install…

So basically the authorities outsourced a part of public safety to the ad companies?

Pretty much. The article says that the contracts require the lighting so that the area is illuminated. I'm gonna guess, however, that they wouldn't keep up the lighting if it weren't required.

Which really isn't so surprising, considering how pervasive advertising is in many societies.

Post reply on HN