3 ms·

Yes, "if you block ads the terrorists win"... but I am not so sure that Netflix / HBO and Wikipedia are models for the internet as a whole. Google runs the bigg

by mbubb 11y ago

Yes, "if you block ads the terrorists win"... but I am not so sure that Netflix / HBO and Wikipedia are models for the internet as a whole. Google runs the biggest ad exchange on the internet and Appnexus is a distant 2nd. I think the article might be right that advertising is the main revenue generator on the internet and keeps the internet free (as in 'tracked', not beer). An interesting issue would come up with the adopocalyse - internet content would be for those who could pay for it. What % of Brazil (or US for that matter) would lose access to free/adtracked services like gmail, twitter, etc.

soneca 11y ago
I think the point is that is a false argument to say that advertising on the internet will end abruptly with nothing else to do unless regret our decisions. This is not nuclear weapons under the control of dellusional men. This is a complex, descentralized industry with lot of incentives to change and adapt if it starts to crumble. And it won't be necessarily copying Netflix model, that is just a past example. It will be by inovating in ways I can't predict. If the people start loosing access to beneficial things because of their behavior, they will change behavior. There is a term for this fallacy I guess - when you threat with an absurd proposition "imagine what happens if all advertising is sunddenly completely banned from internet, bad things will happen", only to push forward your proposition of "hey, let's just keep everything as it is right now, it's all fine, we don't want to risk imploding capitalismo do we?" That is what this guy is doing.
- mbubb 11y ago
  Yes agreed - a pernicious example is the "if we do/ don't do X the terrorists will win". I also agree just because I cannot imagine it that there is not a better model out there. It is not trivial though if we explode the current DoubleClick / Amazon paradigm of advertising/ recommending by tracking. Walled gardens - subscription or ad driven - are not the answer either. "we don't want to risk imploding capitalismo do we?" No I really don't. The stock market crashes and poor people disproportionately suffer. If the EFF were running this adpocalypse maybe but it won't be. It will be whoever can keep the lights on. But in this narrow case here is what I worry about. The Doubleclick model emerged in a very similar climate of a scourge killing the internet. In that case SPAM in the late 90's. Targeted ads were among other things the spam killer. So the spammeisters went to work in adtech (I've worked for a few)...plus c'est la même chose .

by mbubb 11y ago

soneca 11y ago

I think the point is that is a false argument to say that advertising on the internet will end abruptly with nothing else to do unless regret our decisions. This is not nuclear weapons under the control of dellusional men. This is a complex, descentralized industry with lot of incentives to change and adapt if it starts to crumble. And it won't be necessarily copying Netflix model, that is just a past example. It will be by inovating in ways I can't predict. If the people start loosing access to beneficial things because of their behavior, they will change behavior. There is a term for this fallacy I guess - when you threat with an absurd proposition "imagine what happens if all advertising is sunddenly completely banned from internet, bad things will happen", only to push forward your proposition of "hey, let's just keep everything as it is right now, it's all fine, we don't want to risk imploding capitalismo do we?" That is what this guy is doing.

mbubb 11y ago
Yes agreed - a pernicious example is the "if we do/ don't do X the terrorists will win". I also agree just because I cannot imagine it that there is not a better model out there. It is not trivial though if we explode the current DoubleClick / Amazon paradigm of advertising/ recommending by tracking. Walled gardens - subscription or ad driven - are not the answer either. "we don't want to risk imploding capitalismo do we?" No I really don't. The stock market crashes and poor people disproportionately suffer. If the EFF were running this adpocalypse maybe but it won't be. It will be whoever can keep the lights on. But in this narrow case here is what I worry about. The Doubleclick model emerged in a very similar climate of a scourge killing the internet. In that case SPAM in the late 90's. Targeted ads were among other things the spam killer. So the spammeisters went to work in adtech (I've worked for a few)...plus c'est la même chose .