7 ms·

In the present society, the advertisers managed to completely ruin the way cities look with their endless flashing neon signs (and in the past few years I've no

In the present society, the advertisers managed to completely ruin the way cities look with their endless flashing neon signs (and in the past few years I've noticed a vast increase in audio-based advertisements outside), they have ruined the best observation spots, skylines, and in many cases, even parks with their billboards; the public TV which is funded by tax money is a complete ad-cancer. The same with radio, or sports games. It got me to the point where I consciously block every advertisement, but it sometimes gets really mentally taxing. I've stopped listening to radio, watching TV or basically going to any larger-scale public outing. I am not giving them the internet too! They can take their unwritten pact and starve. The worst offenders however, are the ones that require a payment to use, and still completely overwhelm you with the ads (Public transport in my case). I do subscribe to some services where the subscription removes ads, and I gladly pay for mobile applications that offer a reasonable (<10$) cost to ad-free experience. However, I have observed the overwhelming majority of content to be completely worthless, and I do not lose anything by not coming back.

satori99 10y ago
Well said. I have nothing but contempt and loathing for the advertising industry. I think they ruin everything. I also quit watching and listening to commercial broadcasters, and even quit working for one. I have a sister who is a successful advertising creative and executive. Our wildly differing and strong opinions on the topic makes for interesting family dinners. I am longing for the day that AR technology gets to the stage where lightweight sun-glass frames can have the ability to overlay classical art, or any other texture, over real-world ads in real-time. I have also been wondering lately if some sort of Adnix [0] like device could be developed using the incredible machine learning software that is becoming widely available. I know very little about such things but I have been meaning to make time to see if it is within my abilities. I'd love to scare my sister with it. [0] Adnix - http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=2223 http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=2223
- humbledrone 10y ago
  What do you think about the fact that the website you linked as a reference is ad-supported? Assuming that you use an ad-blocker, have you contributed money directly to the web site in compensation? It seems that you got some value from the web site. Is this consistent with "advertising ruins everything"? Without ads, do you think the web site would exist at all?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - satori99 10y ago
    Maybe not, but it was the first result of many when I searched for "Adnix". It's not their content either. I did not compensate the site, and I don't feel bad about that at all. I did, however, pay Carl Sagan for it many years ago, when he first published Contact.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    > Without ads, do you think the web site would exist at all? Quite likely. This kind of content is something people tend to maintain out of their own interest in the subject and willingness to share. Ads are added more like as a "why not?" thing. Anyway, there are many ways to monetize that don't involve asking third parties to shove shit at your visitors.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    Plenty of quality sites existed before advertisement flooded the internet. Plenty can exist without advertisements now as well.
- kimburgess 10y ago
  Not quite small and light weight but: http://jonathandub.in/cognizance/ http://jonathandub.in/cognizance/ Also if you would like your phone to replace them with art: http://noad-app.com http://noad-app.com
- developer2 10y ago
  >> I am longing for the day that AR technology gets to the stage where lightweight sun-glass frames can have the ability to overlay classical art, or any other texture, over real-world ads in real-time. Don't hold your breath. The disgusting industry of marketing/advertising will happily pay the AR companies irrefusable sums of cash to have their firmware prevent you from overlaying their ads. Or worse, the ads will be projected directly onto your lenses without even needing to look at the real world. Walled garden AR will win out over any open-source equivalent, as the money involved will monopolize the industry with patented technology. Never underestimate their scummy practices; our obsession with capitalism has made this the status quo even before television ever hit us. Hell, newspapers and public posters were already pulling this crap in the 1800's. This has been our reality since the invention of the word "corporation". Personally, I wish that any business that must advertise to even be viable should not exist. Unfortunately, every business owner who wants a piece of the pie disagrees and will do everything possible to force themselves onto us. Yes, force - it's tantamount to rape in my opinion. Unsolicited, unwanted, unwarranted, and inescapable - were any "person" to shove themselves at you like companies do, it would be considered rape. For example, "retargeting" is literally stalking you everywhere you go. How it is considered acceptable is beyond me.
  - pitaj 10y ago
    > Yes, force - it's tantamount to rape in my opinion. No wonder you and your sister don't get along. This is completely ridiculous.
    - satori99 10y ago
      You are incorrectly replying. I don't think he mentioned his sister. That was my anecdote. I don't think advertising is tantamount to rape. Rape IMO, is one of the most heinous crimes a human can perpetrate on another. But I do think the advertising industry is already well over-the-line that I am comfortable with. The insane fact that we let advertisers track us and keep files on us should make anyone nervous.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    > Walled garden AR will win out over any open-source equivalent, as the money involved will monopolize the industry with patented technology. why? FOSS seems to be doing fairly well across the Internet at the moment.
petre 10y ago
Cities look increasingly like Blade Runner LA.
- gozur88 10y ago
  Blade Runner LA was quite a bit worse, with giant airships floating around blasting audio. No wonder everyone went to the offworld colonies.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    I wonder why that doesn't happen today. It's technically accessible. I've seen a blimp with a banner in the past once. No audio. What stops ad people from jumping at this medium?
    - petre 10y ago
      It's probably against the law to annoy residents with audio ads from blimps and for a good reason. I bet rednecks would shoot their rifles at would be audio ad blimps passing over their property without thinking twice - like they do now with drones. And I don't blame them, because I'd do the same any day.
      - TeMPOraL 10y ago
        I'd buy a rifle for that reason myself. Or revive my high-school hobby of building solid fuel rocket engines. I'm just curious what stops ad blimps from appearing in big cities.
        gozur88 10y ago
        I'm pretty sure the audio would fall afoul of noise ordinances. If not, you'd probably hear it from strip malls. I suspect what stops us from seeing more blimps is cost. They're expensive to operate, and billboards are cheap.
superuser2 10y ago
Most of us are employed producing goods and services for which people are not born with an innate desire. Approximately the only people who can bash advertising without hypocrisy are subsistence farmers. The rest of us are paid to satisfy artificially inseminated needs. Perhaps our specific industries and employers use classier, higher-quality, and more subtle forms of advertisement, but in a truly ad-free world, we'd not spend money on anything but staying fed, warm, and reproductive.
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  I'm curious what led you to such conclusions. That depiction does not match how I view the world at all. Just because an item doesn't prevent one from starving or freezing to death does not mean it is an "artificially inseminated need". Sure, GDP might drop 10% in the short-term if all advertising was banished. Who knows. What I do know is that people won't stop wanting things that make their life better, and in general will continue to buy such things. Advertising is not what keeps us from a peasant lifestyle.
  - zanny 10y ago
    I don't buy for a second that the end of advertising would harm GDP. It would take generations of cultural turnover to move people away from consumerism. If people were not being psychologically manipulated into buying certain products they don't need or want, they will just buy what they want instead.
    - superuser2 10y ago
      How will people know where or how to buy what they want without advertising?
      - DavidWanjiru 10y ago
        How do people know where to find/make the things they do have an innate need for without advertisement as you seem to define it?
thewhitetulip 10y ago
True, the Indian media channels show 60% ads and the same recycled "news" for 40% times. At times they show five minute news and 55 minute adverts, I'm serious, I've seen this happen!
Joeri 10y ago
The U.S. digital ad industry is about 140 billion usd. There are about 200 million working age people to divide that over. That means 700 usd per working age person. Granted, there are many factors that you could use to tweak these numbers up or down (international influence, ad spend roi, ad company margin, wage distribution, ...), but it serves as a ballpark figure. To get rid of online ads would therefore require either everyone paying something on the order of 700 usd per year, or a lot less ad-funded content.
- makomk 10y ago
  Presumably everyone is already paying on the order of 700 USD per year, since the money has to come from somewhere and most of it will come out of the sales of the advertised products
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  > a lot less ad-funded content. I've never understood why this is always seen as such a bad thing. It worked well before, it works well now, and it can work well in the future. I'd even argue that most sites were better before advertisement-based funding became common.
xevb3k 10y ago
I totally agree. However, it's worth bearing in mind that the end game of ad blocking isn't an Internet without adverts. It's an Internet of product placement and "sponsored content".
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  If everyone allowed normal ads through, advertisers wouldn't sit back and say "Well done everyone. Time for us to stop doing sponsored stories! Back to the old model!". They'd still be attacking on two fronts. Ad-blocking just prevents one avenue of attack.
Accacin 10y ago
I'm thankful that the UK is pretty strict in regards to advertising in the UK and we don't have as many signs ruining everything.
coolgeek 10y ago
> The worst offenders however, are the ones that require a payment to use, and still completely overwhelm you with the ads (Public transport in my case) I'm with you on the concept, but public transit is just about the most wrong example you can come up with. Every system that I'm aware of either loses money directly, or would do so if they lost government subsidies. Advertising revenue isn't something that any of them can do without. You may be able to afford to pay a rate that would obviate the need to rely on advertising, but those who most depend on it could not

satori99 10y ago

Well said. I have nothing but contempt and loathing for the advertising industry. I think they ruin everything. I also quit watching and listening to commercial broadcasters, and even quit working for one. I have a sister who is a successful advertising creative and executive. Our wildly differing and strong opinions on the topic makes for interesting family dinners. I am longing for the day that AR technology gets to the stage where lightweight sun-glass frames can have the ability to overlay classical art, or any other texture, over real-world ads in real-time. I have also been wondering lately if some sort of Adnix [0] like device could be developed using the incredible machine learning software that is becoming widely available. I know very little about such things but I have been meaning to make time to see if it is within my abilities. I'd love to scare my sister with it. [0] Adnix - http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=2223 http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=2223

humbledrone 10y ago
What do you think about the fact that the website you linked as a reference is ad-supported? Assuming that you use an ad-blocker, have you contributed money directly to the web site in compensation? It seems that you got some value from the web site. Is this consistent with "advertising ruins everything"? Without ads, do you think the web site would exist at all?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- satori99 10y ago
  Maybe not, but it was the first result of many when I searched for "Adnix". It's not their content either. I did not compensate the site, and I don't feel bad about that at all. I did, however, pay Carl Sagan for it many years ago, when he first published Contact.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  > Without ads, do you think the web site would exist at all? Quite likely. This kind of content is something people tend to maintain out of their own interest in the subject and willingness to share. Ads are added more like as a "why not?" thing. Anyway, there are many ways to monetize that don't involve asking third parties to shove shit at your visitors.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  Plenty of quality sites existed before advertisement flooded the internet. Plenty can exist without advertisements now as well.
kimburgess 10y ago
Not quite small and light weight but: http://jonathandub.in/cognizance/ http://jonathandub.in/cognizance/ Also if you would like your phone to replace them with art: http://noad-app.com http://noad-app.com
developer2 10y ago
>> I am longing for the day that AR technology gets to the stage where lightweight sun-glass frames can have the ability to overlay classical art, or any other texture, over real-world ads in real-time. Don't hold your breath. The disgusting industry of marketing/advertising will happily pay the AR companies irrefusable sums of cash to have their firmware prevent you from overlaying their ads. Or worse, the ads will be projected directly onto your lenses without even needing to look at the real world. Walled garden AR will win out over any open-source equivalent, as the money involved will monopolize the industry with patented technology. Never underestimate their scummy practices; our obsession with capitalism has made this the status quo even before television ever hit us. Hell, newspapers and public posters were already pulling this crap in the 1800's. This has been our reality since the invention of the word "corporation". Personally, I wish that any business that must advertise to even be viable should not exist. Unfortunately, every business owner who wants a piece of the pie disagrees and will do everything possible to force themselves onto us. Yes, force - it's tantamount to rape in my opinion. Unsolicited, unwanted, unwarranted, and inescapable - were any "person" to shove themselves at you like companies do, it would be considered rape. For example, "retargeting" is literally stalking you everywhere you go. How it is considered acceptable is beyond me.
- pitaj 10y ago
  > Yes, force - it's tantamount to rape in my opinion. No wonder you and your sister don't get along. This is completely ridiculous.
  - satori99 10y ago
    You are incorrectly replying. I don't think he mentioned his sister. That was my anecdote. I don't think advertising is tantamount to rape. Rape IMO, is one of the most heinous crimes a human can perpetrate on another. But I do think the advertising industry is already well over-the-line that I am comfortable with. The insane fact that we let advertisers track us and keep files on us should make anyone nervous.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  > Walled garden AR will win out over any open-source equivalent, as the money involved will monopolize the industry with patented technology. why? FOSS seems to be doing fairly well across the Internet at the moment.

petre 10y ago

Cities look increasingly like Blade Runner LA.

gozur88 10y ago
Blade Runner LA was quite a bit worse, with giant airships floating around blasting audio. No wonder everyone went to the offworld colonies.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  I wonder why that doesn't happen today. It's technically accessible. I've seen a blimp with a banner in the past once. No audio. What stops ad people from jumping at this medium?
  - petre 10y ago
    It's probably against the law to annoy residents with audio ads from blimps and for a good reason. I bet rednecks would shoot their rifles at would be audio ad blimps passing over their property without thinking twice - like they do now with drones. And I don't blame them, because I'd do the same any day.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      I'd buy a rifle for that reason myself. Or revive my high-school hobby of building solid fuel rocket engines. I'm just curious what stops ad blimps from appearing in big cities.
      - gozur88 10y ago
        I'm pretty sure the audio would fall afoul of noise ordinances. If not, you'd probably hear it from strip malls. I suspect what stops us from seeing more blimps is cost. They're expensive to operate, and billboards are cheap.

superuser2 10y ago

Most of us are employed producing goods and services for which people are not born with an innate desire. Approximately the only people who can bash advertising without hypocrisy are subsistence farmers. The rest of us are paid to satisfy artificially inseminated needs. Perhaps our specific industries and employers use classier, higher-quality, and more subtle forms of advertisement, but in a truly ad-free world, we'd not spend money on anything but staying fed, warm, and reproductive.

dwaltrip 10y ago
I'm curious what led you to such conclusions. That depiction does not match how I view the world at all. Just because an item doesn't prevent one from starving or freezing to death does not mean it is an "artificially inseminated need". Sure, GDP might drop 10% in the short-term if all advertising was banished. Who knows. What I do know is that people won't stop wanting things that make their life better, and in general will continue to buy such things. Advertising is not what keeps us from a peasant lifestyle.
- zanny 10y ago
  I don't buy for a second that the end of advertising would harm GDP. It would take generations of cultural turnover to move people away from consumerism. If people were not being psychologically manipulated into buying certain products they don't need or want, they will just buy what they want instead.
  - superuser2 10y ago
    How will people know where or how to buy what they want without advertising?
    - DavidWanjiru 10y ago
      How do people know where to find/make the things they do have an innate need for without advertisement as you seem to define it?

thewhitetulip 10y ago

True, the Indian media channels show 60% ads and the same recycled "news" for 40% times. At times they show five minute news and 55 minute adverts, I'm serious, I've seen this happen!

Joeri 10y ago

The U.S. digital ad industry is about 140 billion usd. There are about 200 million working age people to divide that over. That means 700 usd per working age person. Granted, there are many factors that you could use to tweak these numbers up or down (international influence, ad spend roi, ad company margin, wage distribution, ...), but it serves as a ballpark figure. To get rid of online ads would therefore require either everyone paying something on the order of 700 usd per year, or a lot less ad-funded content.

makomk 10y ago
Presumably everyone is already paying on the order of 700 USD per year, since the money has to come from somewhere and most of it will come out of the sales of the advertised products
CaptSpify 10y ago
> a lot less ad-funded content. I've never understood why this is always seen as such a bad thing. It worked well before, it works well now, and it can work well in the future. I'd even argue that most sites were better before advertisement-based funding became common.

xevb3k 10y ago

I totally agree. However, it's worth bearing in mind that the end game of ad blocking isn't an Internet without adverts. It's an Internet of product placement and "sponsored content".

CaptSpify 10y ago
If everyone allowed normal ads through, advertisers wouldn't sit back and say "Well done everyone. Time for us to stop doing sponsored stories! Back to the old model!". They'd still be attacking on two fronts. Ad-blocking just prevents one avenue of attack.

Accacin 10y ago

I'm thankful that the UK is pretty strict in regards to advertising in the UK and we don't have as many signs ruining everything.

coolgeek 10y ago

> The worst offenders however, are the ones that require a payment to use, and still completely overwhelm you with the ads (Public transport in my case) I'm with you on the concept, but public transit is just about the most wrong example you can come up with. Every system that I'm aware of either loses money directly, or would do so if they lost government subsidies. Advertising revenue isn't something that any of them can do without. You may be able to afford to pay a rate that would obviate the need to rely on advertising, but those who most depend on it could not