4 ms·

> I'm ethically opposed to adblockers as they deny content creators a means of making money for their work. Quick rebuttal: - People who use adblockers aren't

by luxpir 11y ago

> I'm ethically opposed to adblockers as they deny content creators a means of making money for their work. Quick rebuttal: - People who use adblockers aren't likely to click ads anyway (maybe improving CTR for advertisers?). - Server logs can still tell you how many 'hits' you've had, which were bots etc. even if various JS analytics snippets are blocked. These can be shared with ad partners, even if 100% of your visitors use adblocking. - Advertising is not the only way to make money from writing/media and I'm becoming ever more convinced that it is even an immoral and hostile action on behalf of the advertisers and their partners (unless done in a mutually beneficial way, such as keyword bidding/ads relevant to expressed commercial needs). Sadly the response to all this seems to be increased product placement. There are cultural divides between various countries and the web will most likely homogenise over the average at one point, but in areas of ad-desensitized culture we'll see the worst of advertising (or best, depending on your viewpoint). EDIT(3): uMatrix + pihole user (uMatrix for me, pihole for everyone else on the network, mobile and tab included)

thedevil 11y ago
1: I don't judge anyone for using adblockers because there's a lot of moral grey area here. 2: "Advertising is not the only way to make money from writing/media" -> I don't think this is a very good argument. It may be the only reasonable way for that content creator to make money. 3: "I'm becoming ever more convinced that it is even an immoral and hostile action" -> Some of these ads are hostile, but some are attempting to make money in a very reasonable way. You're demonizing the entire group, including some who are creating value for you and me. Edit: A little anecdote: There is a project I'd like to do that involves investing considerable time and money in creating content that will be shared with the world and would help a lot of people. I'd like to make some money back out of it for my time and costs. Free but with ads is the best way to help the most people but still make money. However, it might be difficult to make much and I would have to deal with people attacking me for trying to make money off ads. This is a factor that is actually affecting my decision as to whether or not I pursue this project (which I will decide in the next several months).
- luxpir 11y ago
  Appreciate the further consideration of those points. As for your project; do it! If it'll help people, write it all and release it under a creative commons licence. Spread it far and wide. It could be your legacy, long after you've left the earth and stopped worrying about money. I self-published a book in 2011. I charged for it. It ran its course, the product lifecycle played out and I'd made more than it cost to put it together. It's now free to read on my site and will soon be added to the creative commons as a PDF to be freely shared. I continue to benefit from its existence in other ways than monetary. If you really do want money in return for the effort, charge for the publication. Get it published professionally or self-publish and promote it widely. Do you think the ad model is best because you are convinced people will only find what they're looking for through a search engine or social media? EDIT: Would the people you help with your publication be helped even more by the ads displayed alongside it? Who would click the ads to make the project pay?
dfc 11y ago
> immoral and hostile Have these become code words for something beyond or outside of the dictionary definition? I have seen both of these words used recently in such a hyperbolic manner that defied any other explanation.
- luxpir 11y ago
  I'm using them literally. Immoral as in 'not a moral activity' and hostile as in 'attacking my freedom'. I think we probably agree that advertising can be improved, it's just likely that I'm more offended by it than you are. Maybe for cultural reasons or maybe because I'm an idealist.
lmkg 11y ago
Quick rebuttal to the quick rebuttal: - Many advertisers pay by the impressions, especially "premium" ad slots. They treat ads as billboards and pay for "reach." - (1) If you're using a CDN, hits don't got to your server (2) Advertisers trust numbers from an industry-common analytics solution, they don't trust something hand-rolled - Agreed on your last point, I think ad-supported content is creating perverse incentives for content creators.
- luxpir 11y ago
  Quick rebuttal to the quick rebuttal's quick rebuttal: - Potential improvement to adblockers: a sacrificial server needs setting up that displays these ads to nobody in a dark room somewhere when triggered by the adblock software, thereby maintaining 'reach' figures for the scattergun advertisers. - (1) Potential improvement to CDN services: display hit counters for users. (2) Many industry-standard analytics solutions use server logs for quantification. - Agreed on your agreement point.

by luxpir 11y ago

thedevil 11y ago

1: I don't judge anyone for using adblockers because there's a lot of moral grey area here. 2: "Advertising is not the only way to make money from writing/media" -> I don't think this is a very good argument. It may be the only reasonable way for that content creator to make money. 3: "I'm becoming ever more convinced that it is even an immoral and hostile action" -> Some of these ads are hostile, but some are attempting to make money in a very reasonable way. You're demonizing the entire group, including some who are creating value for you and me. Edit: A little anecdote: There is a project I'd like to do that involves investing considerable time and money in creating content that will be shared with the world and would help a lot of people. I'd like to make some money back out of it for my time and costs. Free but with ads is the best way to help the most people but still make money. However, it might be difficult to make much and I would have to deal with people attacking me for trying to make money off ads. This is a factor that is actually affecting my decision as to whether or not I pursue this project (which I will decide in the next several months).

luxpir 11y ago
Appreciate the further consideration of those points. As for your project; do it! If it'll help people, write it all and release it under a creative commons licence. Spread it far and wide. It could be your legacy, long after you've left the earth and stopped worrying about money. I self-published a book in 2011. I charged for it. It ran its course, the product lifecycle played out and I'd made more than it cost to put it together. It's now free to read on my site and will soon be added to the creative commons as a PDF to be freely shared. I continue to benefit from its existence in other ways than monetary. If you really do want money in return for the effort, charge for the publication. Get it published professionally or self-publish and promote it widely. Do you think the ad model is best because you are convinced people will only find what they're looking for through a search engine or social media? EDIT: Would the people you help with your publication be helped even more by the ads displayed alongside it? Who would click the ads to make the project pay?

dfc 11y ago

> immoral and hostile Have these become code words for something beyond or outside of the dictionary definition? I have seen both of these words used recently in such a hyperbolic manner that defied any other explanation.

luxpir 11y ago
I'm using them literally. Immoral as in 'not a moral activity' and hostile as in 'attacking my freedom'. I think we probably agree that advertising can be improved, it's just likely that I'm more offended by it than you are. Maybe for cultural reasons or maybe because I'm an idealist.

lmkg 11y ago

Quick rebuttal to the quick rebuttal: - Many advertisers pay by the impressions, especially "premium" ad slots. They treat ads as billboards and pay for "reach." - (1) If you're using a CDN, hits don't got to your server (2) Advertisers trust numbers from an industry-common analytics solution, they don't trust something hand-rolled - Agreed on your last point, I think ad-supported content is creating perverse incentives for content creators.

luxpir 11y ago
Quick rebuttal to the quick rebuttal's quick rebuttal: - Potential improvement to adblockers: a sacrificial server needs setting up that displays these ads to nobody in a dark room somewhere when triggered by the adblock software, thereby maintaining 'reach' figures for the scattergun advertisers. - (1) Potential improvement to CDN services: display hit counters for users. (2) Many industry-standard analytics solutions use server logs for quantification. - Agreed on your agreement point.