Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the only thing he's guilty of.
explain
It's all a scam.
Vietnam bans unskippable ads
791–800 of 835 posts
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#792About a decade ago, a mobile gaming company I was at, accidentally shipped a full-screen ad without the art asset for the close button, so the button was invisible. The ad basically forced users to visit the in-app store for a moment before they could close it. The sad part is that day we broke all previous daily revenue records.
I don't understand why we don't have a law that specifies an operating-system level input that will always close an ad.
No hunting for tiny X's. No shifting DOM to dodge clicks. Hit Esc and it stops. For iOS and Android force it as part of the UI, like the volume buttons, back/home buttons.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#793Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not a great regulatory move, in my opinion. > But I really wish ad companies would implement this rule across the board. You don't see how these are conflicting viewpoints? What do you think would compel a company to act in some way that is not in line with its short term financial interests? Sheer luck?
Long term financial interests, mostly. I know the ads run on my network will never, under any circumstance, be allowed to appear without a skip button within 5 seconds. Immediately, if possible. The only conditional is when the skip button appears, not if. And that's divorced from the copy; the component that plays the ad doesn't care what copy is running, it controls the skipability. If an advertiser does not like t…
I see them as conflicting viewpoints because as a general rule companies do not focus on
> Long term financial interests, mostly.
It's great that you as an individual feel otherwise (I do too), but there are larger macro forces at work which compel firms to act the way they do: pursue short term growth at all costs. The counter-balance to this is either a strong regulatory environment, or a hope and prayer that a majority of companies suddenly gain a strong CEO who feels otherwise and is not obligated to satisfy shareholders who don't. Only a few such CEOs come to mind, and they're looking increasingly short for this world.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#794Socialists countries, always in the forefront of basic human rights.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#795Earlier quoted context omitted.
A fantastic video from Matt, as usual. Yet another data point on why nobody should be wasting a second watching Mr Beast content. Complete algorithmically optimized garbage. I recall Mr Beast showing up in a Colin Furze video for a few minutes and Mr Beast was very clearly incapable of being a normal person. He was obviously out of place, being in full makeup and styled, and couldn't seem to be bothered to actually e…
That Colin Furze cameo was so weird.
From what I can tell, based on an excerpt of an interview with Colin, Mr Beast had a bunker-related video and visited Colin's bunker. As a viewer of Colin's channel and not Mr Beast, it seemed very strange, but makes more sense if there was a more substantial collaboration taking place in a different video stream.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#796I just uninstalled a game from my mobile phone this morning that had heavy ad usage. It was interesting to note the different ad display strategies. From least to most annoying: - display a static ad, have the "x" to close appear soon (3-10 seconds) - display an animated ad, have the "x" to close appear soon (3-10 seconds) - display a static ad, have the "x" to close appear after 20-30 seconds - display an animated a…
My favorite mobile game ad was for Jeep, which was 3 seconds of the word JEEP on a black background. My wife and I laugh about it, but we remember it. It was actually really effective in that regard.
My second favorite was for some pirate game, but the ads were basically the setup for an adult movie, with tons of hammy overacting. I thought they were so funny, I was really sad when they stopped.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#797Earlier quoted context omitted.
Long term financial interests, mostly. I know the ads run on my network will never, under any circumstance, be allowed to appear without a skip button within 5 seconds. Immediately, if possible. The only conditional is when the skip button appears, not if. And that's divorced from the copy; the component that plays the ad doesn't care what copy is running, it controls the skipability. If an advertiser does not like t…
I see them as conflicting viewpoints because as a general rule companies do not focus on > Long term financial interests, mostly. It's great that you as an individual feel otherwise (I do too), but there are larger macro forces at work which compel firms to act the way they do: pursue short term growth at all costs. The counter-balance to this is either a strong regulatory environment, or a hope and prayer that a maj…
Well, you can already see my hope and prayer. I don't think it's unlikely to come about as you do; rather I think that in the long run the market will eventually reward the better behavior, as any good capitalist believes. But rest assured that I also want a strong regulatory environment. The only winning long term strategy is to be twice as forgiving as you are punitive. So that means forgive a lot, but still punish when applicable. Given that, I think good laws derived from sound reason, voted on by a free public are a great way to both guide and punish all entities, including corporate ones. I just don't think that this regulation is the kind that is derived from sound reason.
I think there are so many issues with this type of regulation that circumvention will be inevitable and, like with so many other things, lead to a worse outcome overall. I think good regulation will look different altogether, but it's hard for me to imagine what it will look like. My best guess is that it will target different choke points, or target them in different ways. Maybe like... subsidies for content creators that enforce a 5-second limit on ads? It's not something many have control over now, but a platform would instantly become more attractive to content creators if they were allowed to dictate that.
Seems like that would have some sour ramifications as well, but it's just off the top of my head. The point is, I'm not against regulating the hell out of these giant industries, or these industry giants. I'm all for it. I just want it to actually work/make things better.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#798Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is entirely a human construct, we can absolutely make it a level playing field if we collectively choose so. What a sad comment.
Until you try to grapple with real world problems like limited shelf space, limited directory space, how the ads (ahem sorry, directory entries) should be sorted, how to deal with setting boundaries around local directories, etc.
Good thing there is no fundamental law of the universe forcing merchants to stock every single good ever invented.
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#799Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mr. Beast on youtube is guilty of that. Matt Parker of Standup Maths fame did an in-depth look at how that works. Whoever came up with that type of progress bar must hate people in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc0OU1yJD-c
A fantastic video from Matt, as usual. Yet another data point on why nobody should be wasting a second watching Mr Beast content. Complete algorithmically optimized garbage. I recall Mr Beast showing up in a Colin Furze video for a few minutes and Mr Beast was very clearly incapable of being a normal person. He was obviously out of place, being in full makeup and styled, and couldn't seem to be bothered to actually e…
Every time see Mr Beast (I don't watch any of his stuff, just accidentally see promos on Prime sometimes), he reminds me of Homer Simpson's forced smile in the Simpsons' espiode "Re-Nedufication" [0].
[0]: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c8/84/8e/c8848e81afa88a42bd4d...
Re: Vietnam bans unskippable ads
#800Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your revenue comes from parasitical strategies it's negative sum and the economy is better off without it.
Are you seriously trying to argue the world is better off without YouTube? I derive incredible value from YouTube. It wasn't always great, but it is recently full of extremely good educational content, tech talks, independent journalism, how-tos, independent film and animation, and so much more. I'd wager that you use and benefit from a lot of services that are paid for via advertising. Even public transit is subsidi…
You know perfectly well that's not what I wrote. Putting words in others' mouths is a form of lying, and not conducive to discussion.