3 ms·

Let me fix that for you: The Adblockers will lose horrifically. It will be worse than wack-a-mole, similar to the file-sharing industry's futile attempts to ke

Let me fix that for you: The Adblockers will lose horrifically. It will be worse than wack-a-mole, similar to the file-sharing industry's futile attempts to keep music free and shareable... I now pay more per month for music than I did at any other time in my life, and I am becoming locked in to paying more per month forever. The music industry has won, they've replaced their old business model with one that costs us more while they take less risk. Some people really dislike the idea of ads. They install adblockers. Publishers who make their living from ads respond. Who has more motivation, those who are vaguely annoyed, or those who lose their jobs and companies if they fail? The latter, of course. They will find a way around this because they have everything to lose. I dislike the IAB, it's a force against progress within the ad business. But they're not going to lose horrifically, and even if they lose slightly it won't mean that you have won, just like with music.

explorer666 11y ago
By your logic, people starving or being bombed could stop famine and wars because they have more motivation. What actually happens: whoever has more power wins. I have the power over my browser. I won't consume ads.
- bduerst 11y ago
  Doesn't matter. Following that same hypothetical, you alone can dodge the bombs but most people can't, because let's face it - you're not colluding with others. And unless you're up to date on bomb tech, even you are eventually going to get hit by a smart "ad".
  - vitd 11y ago
    The problem for content produces is that if I end up in a situation where I can't get your content without ads (I'm willing to pay), then I'm eventually going to not view your content, and I'm going to not share your content, and others will do the same, and you'll see readership drop. When readership drops, any revenue you had from ads will also drop because some of the people I shared your articles with viewed your ads, even if I didn't. Furthermore, when the OS vendors are putting ad blocking tech into their browsers, I no longer worry about the ad producers having the better tech. When smart bomb detection is built-in to the OS, all I need is an update and mom and pop can avoid the bombs as well as anyone.
    - bduerst 11y ago
      > I'm going to not share your content, and others will do the same, and you'll see readership drop The point is that you're extrapolating your intent and level of control to the rest of the internet audience, which you're not colluding with. The ad-blocking at OS level is arguably even easier to detect than browser-based. It also doesn't stop advertising in apps, which is an example of how Apple is incentivized to keep advertising for it's own platform (i.e. Apple is looking out for #1 when it comes to blocking ads, not you).
- manicdee 11y ago
  I can turn off JavaScript, those people being bombed can not turn off the sky. If it gets to the point that sites are placing ads into the content themselves, I will likely end up sticking only to sites that are subscription or donation based.
meeper16 11y ago
The IAB and its corporate drones and whoever they attempt to hire are no match for today's (or yesterday's) independent and thoughtful hackers, software developers and engineers, just like the music industry was no match for a technology company called Apple and was no match for P2P. "Some people really dislike ... ads"? Lets be honest, Try "Most". There's no subsitute for free speech and freedom in general, particulary in the way that one wants to consume content of anykind.
- ganeumann 11y ago
  "The IAB and its corporate drones..." I agree the IAB is no match, but the corporate drones you refer to are Google and Facebook, both of which will cease to exist without advertising revenue.
insipid 11y ago
> I now pay more per month for music than I did at any other time in my life Me too, but I don't feel that that's a win for the music industry, I see that as a win for me. I didn't engage with a business model that didn't work for me, like millions of others; and eventually a business model emerged that I was willing to support. Maybe Napster lost, but I still got what I wanted, and it seems like the record labels did too. Why would you assume the same thing is impossible for online publishing?
- bduerst 11y ago
  Probably because it's the same principal of creative content consumption. Sure you've got your go-to artists and albums, but music discovery is so much easier when you have an all-access pass to everything. Same goes with the news - you'll always have your BBCs, Reuters, etc. but you also want to see something new and creative, which [probably] wouldn't have got off the ground if it required paid consumption models.
AJ007 11y ago
Two outcomes for publishers in general, more profit-biased content and more content users are asked to pay for. Facebook and any other apps with very large audiences are the big winners.

explorer666 11y ago

By your logic, people starving or being bombed could stop famine and wars because they have more motivation. What actually happens: whoever has more power wins. I have the power over my browser. I won't consume ads.

bduerst 11y ago
Doesn't matter. Following that same hypothetical, you alone can dodge the bombs but most people can't, because let's face it - you're not colluding with others. And unless you're up to date on bomb tech, even you are eventually going to get hit by a smart "ad".
- vitd 11y ago
  The problem for content produces is that if I end up in a situation where I can't get your content without ads (I'm willing to pay), then I'm eventually going to not view your content, and I'm going to not share your content, and others will do the same, and you'll see readership drop. When readership drops, any revenue you had from ads will also drop because some of the people I shared your articles with viewed your ads, even if I didn't. Furthermore, when the OS vendors are putting ad blocking tech into their browsers, I no longer worry about the ad producers having the better tech. When smart bomb detection is built-in to the OS, all I need is an update and mom and pop can avoid the bombs as well as anyone.
  - bduerst 11y ago
    > I'm going to not share your content, and others will do the same, and you'll see readership drop The point is that you're extrapolating your intent and level of control to the rest of the internet audience, which you're not colluding with. The ad-blocking at OS level is arguably even easier to detect than browser-based. It also doesn't stop advertising in apps, which is an example of how Apple is incentivized to keep advertising for it's own platform (i.e. Apple is looking out for #1 when it comes to blocking ads, not you).
manicdee 11y ago
I can turn off JavaScript, those people being bombed can not turn off the sky. If it gets to the point that sites are placing ads into the content themselves, I will likely end up sticking only to sites that are subscription or donation based.

meeper16 11y ago

The IAB and its corporate drones and whoever they attempt to hire are no match for today's (or yesterday's) independent and thoughtful hackers, software developers and engineers, just like the music industry was no match for a technology company called Apple and was no match for P2P. "Some people really dislike ... ads"? Lets be honest, Try "Most". There's no subsitute for free speech and freedom in general, particulary in the way that one wants to consume content of anykind.

ganeumann 11y ago
"The IAB and its corporate drones..." I agree the IAB is no match, but the corporate drones you refer to are Google and Facebook, both of which will cease to exist without advertising revenue.

insipid 11y ago

> I now pay more per month for music than I did at any other time in my life Me too, but I don't feel that that's a win for the music industry, I see that as a win for me. I didn't engage with a business model that didn't work for me, like millions of others; and eventually a business model emerged that I was willing to support. Maybe Napster lost, but I still got what I wanted, and it seems like the record labels did too. Why would you assume the same thing is impossible for online publishing?

bduerst 11y ago
Probably because it's the same principal of creative content consumption. Sure you've got your go-to artists and albums, but music discovery is so much easier when you have an all-access pass to everything. Same goes with the news - you'll always have your BBCs, Reuters, etc. but you also want to see something new and creative, which [probably] wouldn't have got off the ground if it required paid consumption models.

AJ007 11y ago

Two outcomes for publishers in general, more profit-biased content and more content users are asked to pay for. Facebook and any other apps with very large audiences are the big winners.