4 ms·
Damn, that article took a strange leap with discussing what better ads would be. Somehow it entirely skipped the possibility that more ads might resemble the ad
by wmt 11y ago
Damn, that article took a strange leap with discussing what better ads would be. Somehow it entirely skipped the possibility that more ads might resemble the ads of the most successful advertisers of the web (like google, facebook, twitter) and instead leaped on a dystopian slope where all ads are served by the content platforms of those companies.
Saying that twitter, google or facebook ads cannot be blocked is just bogus. People use them on normal web browsers that quite easily could block them. The reason they're not blocked is that it's not worth the hassle, because the ads are clean, small and polite. You know, better ads.
Such better ads are not patented, and switching to pleasant text ads like the industry leaders leaders did would make ad blockers a marginal phenomenon.
- 001sky 11y agoSuch better ads are not patented, and switching to pleasant text ads like the industry leaders leaders did would make ad blockers a marginal phenomenon. The risk is that advertising would also become a marginal phenomenon.
- a3n 11y agoIt's amazing to me that so many smart minds in content outlets can't figure out a way to make money other than ads, particular privacy invading ads. It's been said often enough and long enough to sound tired, but we really are products, not customers. The entity that a content outlet cares about is the ad networks. NOT you. The content is just a bug zapper meant to attract you in.
- tertius 11y ago"It's amazing to me that so many smart minds in content outlets can't figure out a way to make money other than ads" There are many ways, but nothing that is as profitable.