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

Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 580 posts

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#81

Post by FredFredrickson »

jordigh wrote: post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

If this were attempted, I think we'd have a LOT of talk about what truly is an ad and what isn't.

I mean, the web banners and billboards we see every day don't do a lot to actually sell products. But your friend telling you they really love a particular product helps a lot.

But in a society where a movement such as you've described was in motion, would both be equally as bad? Are both not manipulative in their own way?

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#82

Post by billconan »

jordigh wrote: post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

I want to say exactly the same thing. I block ads because I don't want to see ads at all. As long as there is the ad blocker, I don't want to use brave.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#84

Post by NelsonMinar »

hapless wrote: post #16

It sounds like their plan is to block all ads, then sell the new ad inventory created by all the blank space on pages. Why on earth would users want this browser?

I question the legality and ethics of selling new ads on top of other people's content.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#85

Post by jordigh »

FredFredrickson wrote: post #81
jordigh wrote: post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

If this were attempted, I think we'd have a LOT of talk about what truly is an ad and what isn't. I mean, the web banners and billboards we see every day don't do a lot to actually sell products. But your friend telling you they really love a particular product helps a lot. But in a society where a movement such as you've described was in motion, would both be equally as bad? Are both not manipulative in their own wa…

I'm thinking something like what São Paulo implemented,

https://www.adbusters.org/magazine/73/Sao_Paulo_A_City_Witho...

Or, perhaps, you only get ads when requested. "I'm in the market for a new refrigerator. Please show me ads for refrigerators."

But still, I have a fundamental problem with how all advertising has a slant, and at least a hint of a lie or manipulation. I do not like being lied to or manipulated, but I don't know what the alternative would be.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#86

Post by micampe »

strictnein wrote: post #31
jacquesm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the logical extension of that is that you actually get paid to browse, that might be a gamechanger. Keep in mind that the supply side right now ends at the owner of the web property that starts the ball rolling when in fact it actually starts with the person sitting behind the computer looking at the page. So this is a giant cut-out-the-middle-men opportunity and Eich is fairly uniquely positioned to take advan…

We tried the "paid to browse" thing 15-20 years ago. Didn't go so well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_to_surf

We also tried tablets 20 years ago. And VR 30 years ago. And electric cars 140 years ago.

I don't really believe this project will work, but your argument is rarely a good reason not to try something.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#87

Post by nileshtrivedi »

mrtron wrote: post #40
jacquesm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the logical extension of that is that you actually get paid to browse, that might be a gamechanger. Keep in mind that the supply side right now ends at the owner of the web property that starts the ball rolling when in fact it actually starts with the person sitting behind the computer looking at the page. So this is a giant cut-out-the-middle-men opportunity and Eich is fairly uniquely positioned to take advan…

Paying to browse, a terrible idea that has been tried before. Alladvantage.com raised about 200m on that idea. The wikipedia page isn't correct, they had a pyramid based payout system. Fraudulent users would create enormous numbers of fake users under them and simulate all of their browsing.

In existing model of advertising too, it's possible to fake ad-clicks and cost your competitors a lot of money.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#88

Post by needz »

jordigh wrote: post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

I'd rather have ads I can block than "sponsored content" which may or may not even be labelled as such.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#89

Post by RodericDay »

jordigh wrote: post #70

I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…

I can't emphasize this enough.

Every time someone rattles out a list of "annoyances" regarding ads, I wish that I could plead with them to consider that there's even bigger reasons.

Plenty of people try to sell the idea that ads let us have content "for free", and that all we have to tolerate is "a little annoyance".

It's insane. If companies are buying ad-space, it's because they expect to get more business in return. This means that someone out there is being influenced by said ads, so that if the content cost X to put up online (hosting, funding its creation), someone is paying X+(ad company overhead) for it.

If these costs are being borne evenly, then it's complete societal waste. We could pay X for the content, and not incur the overhead. If these costs are not borne evenly, and some people are paying for the consumption of more disciplined people, it's probably contributing to terrible cycles of poverty (ie: some kid spending money on fancy new shoes he doesn't need and can't afford is paying for a well-paid tech-users YouTube habits, because it preys on their lack of education). Either way it's terrible.

Advertising isn't free. Insofar it works, for some people, it's basically coercive via psychology and simulated peer pressure.

Re: Brave: Brendan Eich's clean-ads browser startup

#90

Post by csense »

lsc wrote: post #51
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #27

Its by the same guy who donated to causes doing their best to make sure two people in love can't get married due to their gender. Sociopathy has many forms and its obvious to me that Eich is just an untrustworthy guy with a lot of bad ideas. Low-rent projects like these is just further evidence that you need a founder/leader you can trust. Its clear he's exhausted his social capital and at age 54 is far away from his…

Diversity, I think, is really important. Diversity of thought as well as all the other kinds of diversity. It's important to be able to work with people who come from different backgrounds, who have different beliefs. I see this on both sides (I see it more often on the left, but that's just because my filter bubble is a somewhat leftish one.. when I step out of that bubble, I see plenty examples of people on the rig…

Yeah. If the only way you can get people to (pretend to) believe an idea (such as "gay marriage is a good thing") is by threatening their livelihood if they don't, it reflects poorly on both you and the idea.
Post reply on HN