6 ms·

Although I have no direct knowledge, it feels like there is something going on behind the scenes forcing this reaction. If I had to guess, I would point the fin

Although I have no direct knowledge, it feels like there is something going on behind the scenes forcing this reaction. If I had to guess, I would point the finger at Ghostery causing this. Lifehacker wrote¹ that Ghostery sells some data to marketers, so perhaps the approach taken with the app interferes with Ghostery's model and they were not willing to continue allowing access to their rule list. Alternatively Ghostery saw the success of the app and now wants to launch their own and shut off access to the data. *edit- He just said he is handing the app over to Ghostery on twitter. Very interesting. ¹ http://lifehacker.com/ad-blocking-extension-ghostery-actually-sells-data-to-a-514417864 http://lifehacker.com/ad-blocking-extension-ghostery-actuall...

w4 11y ago
> If I had to guess, I would point the finger at Ghostery causing this. Lifehacker wrote that Ghostery sells some data to marketers, so perhaps the approach taken with the app interferes with Ghosterys model Doubtful that's the case. If you read his post, he recommends Ghostery several times. It just sounds like he ultimately didn't feel comfortable about making money off something that takes money out of other people's pockets: "I still believe that ad blockers are necessary today, and I still think Ghostery is the best one, but I’ve learned over the last few crazy days that I don’t feel good making one and being the arbiter of what’s blocked...I suggest you use Ghostery on the desktop"
- DanBlake 11y ago
  Recommending them means nothing at all. That is practically the status quo when breaking up with another business, employee or whatever when it is done publicly. (and this obviously had to be public)
  - w4 11y ago
    Right...but nothing about Marco's statement suggests anything besides, "It turns out I feel really weird about making an ad blocker, and there isn't any way I can make an ad blocker that works in a way that doesn't make me feel weird with the iOS framework, so I'm not going to make one anymore." Why not take his statement at face value? He's personally reliant on ad income from his site, as are several of his friends, so it makes sense that profiting off an ad blocker makes him uncomfortable. No conspiracy needed. (For background, see: http://www.marco.org/2015/09/17/why-peace-blocks-deck-ads http://www.marco.org/2015/09/17/why-peace-blocks-deck-ads)
    - hullo 11y ago
      Just one clarification, and it will seem picky, but while Marco's site does have ads, Marco-the-person is in no sense "reliant" on ad income, as an early Tumblr employee who did well in the IPO and then didn't blow it on yachts and helicopters. In addition to IAP money from his podcast app, selling Instapaper, etc.
      - w4 11y ago
        Fair enough - maybe personally reliant was a bit strong. :) I suspect his own income was less of a concern than his friends' incomes anyways, given he's taking down what is likely a six figure (or seven, over time) app.
cstross 11y ago
Alternatively: I am seeing a lot of angry articles by journalists who see adblockers as an existential threat to them, and Marco also developed Instapaper. He's almost certainly already getting hate mail from content sites who don't like the way that Instapaper renders their content readable without allowing annoying intrusions. Releasing Peace on top of Instapaper set him up as a high-profile target -- even higher with that #1 app store ranking -- and that's no fun at all to live with unless you've got a very thick skin. To those who think the pro-ad folks are right: I'd urge you to meditate on just what the #1 ranking of an ad-blocker in the app store implies about the public's appetite for advertising.
- draw_down 11y ago
  Instapaper is owned by Instapaper Holdings (Betaworks), not Marco. (In addition to starting Instapaper, Marco also started a publication called The Magazine, which he sold and is now shuttered.)
  - sp332 11y ago
    He sold a majority stake to Betaworks, but he is still an owner.
  - scarface74 11y ago
    And let's not gloss over the fact that he made at least a few million from his equity stake in Tumblr when it was sold to Yahoo. He was the first employee of the company. From everything I've heard on his podcast, it is strongly hinted that he really never needs to work another day in his life.
- tobr 11y ago
  Marco Arment sold Instapaper more than two years ago and as far as I know, is not directly involved with it in any way today. Still, as evident by your comment, his name is of course very much associated with it. http://www.marco.org/2013/04/25/instapaper-next-generation http://www.marco.org/2013/04/25/instapaper-next-generation
- TillE 11y ago
carlosrg 11y ago
Doubt it. He probably just thought the app wasn't going to be so popular. He's selling a lot of copies and he just doesn't feel comfortable with it. Hats off to Marco for putting his ethics first, not the money. I said this yesterday and I'm going to repeat myself in this thread: adblocking is not going to "fix" the web as people are saying, for the simple reason ad blockers block all ads, not only annoying ones. The big publishers probably are not going to even notice it, because they have other ways of making money, but the small blogger will have a hard time when the ads on his blog get blocked, probably the only source of income for his site. And we're forgetting people that can't afford anything besides some little AdSense ad to advertise their business. How are they going to reach people if all their ads get blocked?
- inversionOf 11y ago
  Hats off to Marco for putting his ethics first, not the money. I find this sentiment, and the moderation supporting it, incredible and almost a demonstration of the Stockholm Syndrome.
- newscracker 11y ago
  What stops the small blogger from trying to understand why ad revenues are falling and also writing a post asking readers how things can be improved? Readers who like the content will respond, and hopefully, a better ad network could be used and/or other monetization avenues could be considered. Marco has tweeted that he's giving the Peace app code to Ghostery. [1] That can't be considered ethical. That's like being a gunmaker, not feeling comfortable being one, pulling the product from the shelves, and still giving/selling the entire design, patents, manufacturing facilities, etc., to someone else to continue making it and selling it. In this case, even though Ghostery has had its block list and desktop browser extensions for quite sometime, it surely does not need Marco to give away the app's code to it, especially if he had a moral quandary about having made such an app. [1]: https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/644939796624896000 https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/644939796624896000
angryasian 11y ago
I don't agree, there are plenty of other companies/sources out there that could have provided the list. I think the fact that Marco talks all this moralistic pov, while still endorsing ghostery is bs. Just shows he's for sale.
gregcohn 11y ago
It did occur to me that he might have been threatened by a lawsuit (or more than one). I suspect he would have been direct about that, if in a position to, but a large corporation is in a position to put tremendous pressure on a small/indie business, even if they don't have the legal high ground. IIRC, there was a lot of drama between tv networks and Tivo, once upon a time, over the ad-skipping issue, which netted out in a pretty lame detente (Tivo pulling the 30-second-skip button out of standard UI). At the end of the day, the issues are similar (30-second-skip == going the bathroom during the commercial break, but someone productizing it was not). Over a longer period of time, we all started time-shifting tv content and commercials took a big hit anyway (due to Netflix and to Tivo clones and licensees). If anyone thinks a developer like Marco is somehow complicit in the death of traditional, ad-supported media, I hope they're having similar introspection over using spotify instead of buying records. The world doesn't owe a living to people who can steal content, write clickbait headlines, and convert paragraphs into multi-page galleries the most effectively. They will have to adapt. And some will die. And ad-blockers are forever a thing on mobile now.
chipotle_coyote 11y ago
I admit the line "Ghostery and I have both decided that it doesn't serve our goals or beliefs well enough" does make me wonder what Ghostery's input in this decision was. A previous post indicated a future release of Peace would have brought a similar granularity level for individual tracker/network blocking that the Ghostery desktop extension provides. If that's enough nuanced control for the desktop, why isn't it for mobile? Having said that, though, I've followed Marco's writing/podcasting long enough to generally take him at his word. He's been pretty forthright about why he makes the choices he does and acknowledging things he considers mistakes. I noticed that several fairly big names in the Mac blogging/podcasting space came across the last couple of days as very hostile to the notion of ad blockers. Imagine having people you respect, work with at times and have considered friends for years attack the essential concept underpinning your new application as an immoral action that will destroy their livelihood. Given that, I don't find the "I stopped feeling good about this" explanation at all hard to swallow.

w4 11y ago

> If I had to guess, I would point the finger at Ghostery causing this. Lifehacker wrote that Ghostery sells some data to marketers, so perhaps the approach taken with the app interferes with Ghosterys model Doubtful that's the case. If you read his post, he recommends Ghostery several times. It just sounds like he ultimately didn't feel comfortable about making money off something that takes money out of other people's pockets: "I still believe that ad blockers are necessary today, and I still think Ghostery is the best one, but I’ve learned over the last few crazy days that I don’t feel good making one and being the arbiter of what’s blocked...I suggest you use Ghostery on the desktop"

DanBlake 11y ago
Recommending them means nothing at all. That is practically the status quo when breaking up with another business, employee or whatever when it is done publicly. (and this obviously had to be public)
- w4 11y ago
  Right...but nothing about Marco's statement suggests anything besides, "It turns out I feel really weird about making an ad blocker, and there isn't any way I can make an ad blocker that works in a way that doesn't make me feel weird with the iOS framework, so I'm not going to make one anymore." Why not take his statement at face value? He's personally reliant on ad income from his site, as are several of his friends, so it makes sense that profiting off an ad blocker makes him uncomfortable. No conspiracy needed. (For background, see: http://www.marco.org/2015/09/17/why-peace-blocks-deck-ads http://www.marco.org/2015/09/17/why-peace-blocks-deck-ads)
  - hullo 11y ago
    Just one clarification, and it will seem picky, but while Marco's site does have ads, Marco-the-person is in no sense "reliant" on ad income, as an early Tumblr employee who did well in the IPO and then didn't blow it on yachts and helicopters. In addition to IAP money from his podcast app, selling Instapaper, etc.
    - w4 11y ago
      Fair enough - maybe personally reliant was a bit strong. :) I suspect his own income was less of a concern than his friends' incomes anyways, given he's taking down what is likely a six figure (or seven, over time) app.

cstross 11y ago

Alternatively: I am seeing a lot of angry articles by journalists who see adblockers as an existential threat to them, and Marco also developed Instapaper. He's almost certainly already getting hate mail from content sites who don't like the way that Instapaper renders their content readable without allowing annoying intrusions. Releasing Peace on top of Instapaper set him up as a high-profile target -- even higher with that #1 app store ranking -- and that's no fun at all to live with unless you've got a very thick skin. To those who think the pro-ad folks are right: I'd urge you to meditate on just what the #1 ranking of an ad-blocker in the app store implies about the public's appetite for advertising.

draw_down 11y ago
Instapaper is owned by Instapaper Holdings (Betaworks), not Marco. (In addition to starting Instapaper, Marco also started a publication called The Magazine, which he sold and is now shuttered.)
- sp332 11y ago
  He sold a majority stake to Betaworks, but he is still an owner.
- scarface74 11y ago
  And let's not gloss over the fact that he made at least a few million from his equity stake in Tumblr when it was sold to Yahoo. He was the first employee of the company. From everything I've heard on his podcast, it is strongly hinted that he really never needs to work another day in his life.
tobr 11y ago
Marco Arment sold Instapaper more than two years ago and as far as I know, is not directly involved with it in any way today. Still, as evident by your comment, his name is of course very much associated with it. http://www.marco.org/2013/04/25/instapaper-next-generation http://www.marco.org/2013/04/25/instapaper-next-generation
TillE 11y ago

carlosrg 11y ago

Doubt it. He probably just thought the app wasn't going to be so popular. He's selling a lot of copies and he just doesn't feel comfortable with it. Hats off to Marco for putting his ethics first, not the money. I said this yesterday and I'm going to repeat myself in this thread: adblocking is not going to "fix" the web as people are saying, for the simple reason ad blockers block all ads, not only annoying ones. The big publishers probably are not going to even notice it, because they have other ways of making money, but the small blogger will have a hard time when the ads on his blog get blocked, probably the only source of income for his site. And we're forgetting people that can't afford anything besides some little AdSense ad to advertise their business. How are they going to reach people if all their ads get blocked?

inversionOf 11y ago
Hats off to Marco for putting his ethics first, not the money. I find this sentiment, and the moderation supporting it, incredible and almost a demonstration of the Stockholm Syndrome.
newscracker 11y ago
What stops the small blogger from trying to understand why ad revenues are falling and also writing a post asking readers how things can be improved? Readers who like the content will respond, and hopefully, a better ad network could be used and/or other monetization avenues could be considered. Marco has tweeted that he's giving the Peace app code to Ghostery. [1] That can't be considered ethical. That's like being a gunmaker, not feeling comfortable being one, pulling the product from the shelves, and still giving/selling the entire design, patents, manufacturing facilities, etc., to someone else to continue making it and selling it. In this case, even though Ghostery has had its block list and desktop browser extensions for quite sometime, it surely does not need Marco to give away the app's code to it, especially if he had a moral quandary about having made such an app. [1]: https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/644939796624896000 https://twitter.com/marcoarment/status/644939796624896000

angryasian 11y ago

I don't agree, there are plenty of other companies/sources out there that could have provided the list. I think the fact that Marco talks all this moralistic pov, while still endorsing ghostery is bs. Just shows he's for sale.

gregcohn 11y ago

It did occur to me that he might have been threatened by a lawsuit (or more than one). I suspect he would have been direct about that, if in a position to, but a large corporation is in a position to put tremendous pressure on a small/indie business, even if they don't have the legal high ground. IIRC, there was a lot of drama between tv networks and Tivo, once upon a time, over the ad-skipping issue, which netted out in a pretty lame detente (Tivo pulling the 30-second-skip button out of standard UI). At the end of the day, the issues are similar (30-second-skip == going the bathroom during the commercial break, but someone productizing it was not). Over a longer period of time, we all started time-shifting tv content and commercials took a big hit anyway (due to Netflix and to Tivo clones and licensees). If anyone thinks a developer like Marco is somehow complicit in the death of traditional, ad-supported media, I hope they're having similar introspection over using spotify instead of buying records. The world doesn't owe a living to people who can steal content, write clickbait headlines, and convert paragraphs into multi-page galleries the most effectively. They will have to adapt. And some will die. And ad-blockers are forever a thing on mobile now.

chipotle_coyote 11y ago

I admit the line "Ghostery and I have both decided that it doesn't serve our goals or beliefs well enough" does make me wonder what Ghostery's input in this decision was. A previous post indicated a future release of Peace would have brought a similar granularity level for individual tracker/network blocking that the Ghostery desktop extension provides. If that's enough nuanced control for the desktop, why isn't it for mobile? Having said that, though, I've followed Marco's writing/podcasting long enough to generally take him at his word. He's been pretty forthright about why he makes the choices he does and acknowledging things he considers mistakes. I noticed that several fairly big names in the Mac blogging/podcasting space came across the last couple of days as very hostile to the notion of ad blockers. Imagine having people you respect, work with at times and have considered friends for years attack the essential concept underpinning your new application as an immoral action that will destroy their livelihood. Given that, I don't find the "I stopped feeling good about this" explanation at all hard to swallow.