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

Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

politicsjunkie.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 126 posts

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#71

Post by JoshTriplett »

Touche wrote: post #57
jerf wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patreon is saving the world, not AdBlock. It's still early but I expect in 10 years that "trying to make money via ads" is going to see "very 2010s", due to the lack of words for "something done from the late 1990s to the late 2010s". It just doesn't work. It almost works. It is so painfully close to working that we can taste it, which is why it has hung around so long. But eventually, advertising corrupts all souls.…

Isn't Patreon just charity? I don't think that's a sustainable way to pay for content.

No, it isn't charity; it's payment for content. Calling it "charity" implies that the content being provided has no value to the person paying for it.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#72

Post by forgotpasswd3x »

antihero wrote: post #34
bambax wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 99% of online advertisers give the rest a bad name So true; remove "online" from the sentence above and it's even truer. > it's why we hugely and desperately and badly need to find another way of paying for content Not sure about that. Here are the ways I can think of we gain access to content: - by directly paying for it (books, movies, etc.) - by indirectly paying for it (ad supported newspapers articles and such…

What would be interesting is a sort of all-content-subscription - you pay X per month, and it's divvied up between the providers/owners of whatever you use. Kind of like a tax, but actually related to usage. Would be very difficult to have the trust and integration required for it to work though.

I had thought that would be an interesting way to set up a streaming music service.

Ex: I'll agree to pay $X/month, and then at the end of the month, that money gets paid out to the artists I listened to based on how often I listened to them.

It probably wouldn't work, but I don't really feel any current method of music sales is really working for most artists.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#73

Post by Fuxy »

jerf wrote: post #43
bambax wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 99% of online advertisers give the rest a bad name So true; remove "online" from the sentence above and it's even truer. > it's why we hugely and desperately and badly need to find another way of paying for content Not sure about that. Here are the ways I can think of we gain access to content: - by directly paying for it (books, movies, etc.) - by indirectly paying for it (ad supported newspapers articles and such…

Patreon is saving the world, not AdBlock. It's still early but I expect in 10 years that "trying to make money via ads" is going to see "very 2010s", due to the lack of words for "something done from the late 1990s to the late 2010s". It just doesn't work. It almost works. It is so painfully close to working that we can taste it, which is why it has hung around so long. But eventually, advertising corrupts all souls.…

Patrion is a good idea however a better one would be if you could pay £0.01 - £0.05 (pick your currency) per you-tube video watched and not have any ads shown.

Right now everybody in analitics is thinking in the millions of impressions but imagine if you could make £0.05 per impression.

That would be £50,000 per million views.

I wouldn't mind just having a few pounds on my youtube account and using that to avoid seeing ads.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#74

Post by prof_hobart »

dredmorbius wrote: post #18

99% of online advertisers give the rest a bad name. Not only is this why online advertising is ultimately doomed, but it's why we hugely and desperately and badly need to find another way of paying for content. The alternatives for the moment are gratis, patronage, "native advertising", and subscriptions. Few of these strike me as ultimately scalable. I've been a fan of Phil Hunt, of Pirate Party UK, and his broadban…

That tax idea seems fraught with issues to me.

It talks about the BBC as a comparison, and I'm a great admirer of the BBC, but I'm not sure that's a relevant model for internet as a whole. The Beeb is governed by a specific charter covering what it should and shouldn't do. And whilst there's theoretically no government interference in day to day content, there is an explicit understanding that the government could pull their charter if they don't like what they are up to.

Only giving funding to web content that complies with a government-sanctioned charter doesn't seem a great future to me, and it becomes a worryingly small step from there to outright blocking anything that breaches it.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#75

Post by sp332 »

eli wrote: post #42
thaumaturgy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tell our customers that ad blockers are their first line of defense against malware on the web, and it's true. Web ads have been bad for years and continue to get worse, and content providers aren't doing enough yet to police the advertising on their site. Did you happen to see the recent link about the AdSense redirects? e.g. http://blog.sucuri.net/2015/01/adsense-abused-with-malvertis...

If your customers have machines that can be hijacked by drive-by malware, then blocking ads is not going to help them much in the long run.

Even iOS was vulnerable to drive-bys like that. No one is that safe.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#76

Post by philwelch »

Fuxy wrote: post #65
blueskin_ wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Pirate Party UK >broadband tax proposal The Pirate Party is supposed to be pro-internet. This is just a perfect example of how shambolic and badly-organised the UK Pirate Party is, and the reason their membership has been dropping since launch. They are basically a joke party in the UK, where in other countries they have emerged as a significant political force with influence above its size.

With such a proposal I'm not surprised how ca a party of technically skilled people and intelligent people ever come up with such a dumb idea. There are plenty of obscure artists that were able to monetize their work to a certain degree. Now are they making millions? No. They do make a small chunk of change though. With the internet and access to so many good songs the value of a song has decreased and the entertainm…

> With such a proposal I'm not surprised how ca a party of technically skilled people and intelligent people ever come up with such a dumb idea.

After witnessing many sad political arguments on HN, I've concluded that technically skilled people are just as good as anyone else at supporting dumb political ideas.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#77

Post by allendoerfer »

eli wrote: post #42
thaumaturgy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tell our customers that ad blockers are their first line of defense against malware on the web, and it's true. Web ads have been bad for years and continue to get worse, and content providers aren't doing enough yet to police the advertising on their site. Did you happen to see the recent link about the AdSense redirects? e.g. http://blog.sucuri.net/2015/01/adsense-abused-with-malvertis...

If your customers have machines that can be hijacked by drive-by malware, then blocking ads is not going to help them much in the long run.

In a perfect world, were humans make no mistakes, you are right. In the real world however it is best to think about security on every layer of the system to guard the other parts, which might have unknown bugs.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#78

Post by bad_user »

rimantas wrote: post #20
bad_user wrote: post #9

I was originally against ad-blockers, because it provides me with an incentive to look for alternatives and I also want to reward websites that don't do this shit. However, it's because of scams and malware pushed by means of ads that I started using ad-blockers myself and I recommend it to all my non-technical friends. It's also the reason for why on my Android I'm now using Firefox. For Google to not provide at lea…

I am thinking, maybe I should get an ad-blocker. Not tu reward the webistes, but stop punishing poor folks who buy ads and then waste money showing them to me, because I never click them…

The mistake you're doing is thinking only about impulse or intent driven advertising. But there's another form of advertising, which is brand advertising (i.e. CPV).

Why do you think that Coca-Cola or Pepsi insist on airing expensive ads in prime time or on conducting huge marketing campaigns? Because given hundreds of choices in a super-market, you'll go for the ones that have a brand you've heard about and this is because people hate having choices ;-)

And the funny thing is, even if you're isolated from mass-media and using ad-blockers on the net, you still end up noticing marketing campaigns on Facebook, or being suckered into reading ingeniously planted news pieces on the web, or ending up making choices because of your ads-infused friends.

Thing is, advertising affects you and the products you end up buying, even if you think it doesn't, unless you're completely isolated of course.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#79

Post by karmacondon »

skylan_q wrote: post #50
easytiger wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not only is this why online advertising is ultimately doomed, but it's why we hugely and desperately and badly need to find another way of paying for content. Another viable option is letting a lot of the content die. I'm sure we can all live without knowing that one neat trick that you won't believe. In your proposal: > ... constant challenge for any creative type is making a living. Well perhaps if that's the cas…

... constant challenge for any creative type is making a living. Well perhaps if that's the case what you do is not valuable to anyone. People have trouble coming to terms with the fact that they don't necessarily deserve to earn a living because they're doing something they like. It's like people are incapable of growing up anymore.

Something tells me that you benefit daily from the efforts of people who had difficulty earning a living from their craft at some point. Do you listen to music, watch television or movies, appreciate art, read books or web content? The creators of those things didn't all start out as highly acclaimed millionaires. Most of them spent years making things that weren't valuable to anyone.

There are an abundance of people who are capable of earning a living through a variety of work. There are very few people who are capable of consistently providing you with a few hours of diversion or entertainment. Do you really think that the world would be a better place if all of those lazy creative people got jobs at mcdonalds instead of making things that bring small moments of joy to billions of people? There would be no books for young children to read, no songs for teenagers to get excited about at their first dance, no movies for old people to be nostalgic about. It takes a lifetime of work to hone the skills necessary to create those things, and a lot of financial and personal risk that most of us aren't willing to assume. I don't know if a 'creative tax' is the right solution, but we could all be a little more understanding.

Re: Yahoo Homepage – Now Featuring Extra-Scammy Scams

#80

Post by troymc »

mpeg wrote: post #16

Just want to point out that AdChoices is NOT owned by Google, and they do NOT serve any advertising. It's a program organised by the DAA (Digital Advertising Alliance) which is itself formed of several other advertising associations, the goal of which is to be a self-regulatory program allowing to opt out of online behavioral advertising, so that you do not have to see any behavior targeted ads if you choose not to.…

You wrote "it's expensive to fact check every single creative that comes through"

I'm surprised they fact check any ads. Many publications don't have the budget to fact check their news, features, or editorials, never mind the ads.

Post reply on HN