4 ms·

One thing is for certain, ad blocking is going to become more and more prevalent and never less. The end game for ad blocking is to all but eliminate advertisi

by staunch 10y ago

One thing is for certain, ad blocking is going to become more and more prevalent and never less. The end game for ad blocking is to all but eliminate advertising. An ad blocking client could, ultimately, just block any domain that has aggressive anti-ad block features. With enough users doing this, new sites that are ad free would quickly replace the old ad driven sites. Some of the ad driven sites would modernize. Ads are a failed path. By eliminating ads we open the door to novel solutions. Only a cynical fool could believe technology isn't up to solving this minor problem. There are already a dozen potential solutions waiting for the incentives to change.

Kaedon 10y ago
How do you imagine sites that are ad free would appear? What's their business model? I don't think that's a given, especially since most users won't pay (see the rise of freemium style apps vs paid ones in the app store).
- finid 10y ago
  Proponents of adblockers are not thinking this thing through. It takes time (that's money) to create quality content that anybody would love reading. Heck, even content that's crappy takes time to create.
  - colmvp 10y ago
    I block ads, yet I financially support content creators by voluntarily subscribing to them via Patreon or tip them money (e.g. Twitch streamers). I also subscribe to publications to support journalism. I'm also fine with ads in podcasts since the creators will sometimes at least use the product and it's implemented in a way that's largely expected, e.g. (plug in the beginning, plug in the middle, maybe a plug in the end...)
  - nradov 10y ago
    No actually I've thought it through and it wouldn't bother me at all if that content disappears or moves behind a paywall.
  - johnpowell 10y ago
    I remember back in 1994. There was actually better quality content back them. Think of half the sites being Ian's Shoelace Site. People that are just really into something and make a site about it. Static HTML sites that were fairly cheap to run. I had a site about all the special tricks in Tony Hawks Pro Skater. It was simple HTML and I got a ton of hits (this was later in 1999). No ads, I just loved the game.
    - finid 10y ago
      There was better quality in 1994 than there is today? Wow! So is that site still up? If not, why did you stop? Too much effort to keep it running?
finid 10y ago
With enough users doing this, new sites that are ad free would quickly replace the old ad driven sites. And how will ad free sites supposed to pay writers to make and keep the site free? There are already a dozen potential solutions waiting for the incentives to change. Go ahead and list them...
- bunderbunder 10y ago
  My ideal would not be for all sites to go ad free. It would be for advertising to go back to following the model it does everywhere else: Places that sell space for advertising either sell it directly, or go with a 3rd party to handle the advertising, but still maintain some control over what ads are presented, how and when. I have never found ads in buses and trains to be particularly obtrusive, and usually don't find them to be tasteless. Advertising in print media is fine, and oftentimes even useful. Advertising on TV and YouTube is generally tolerable. The only place where ads really become toxic is when they're being served up through ad networks. As far as I can tell, nobody likes them. Users obviously hate them - adblockers are darn near ubiquitous nowadays, and it seems that folks have generally realized that most Web ads have more in common with junk mail and telemarketing than they do with other forms of marketing. Advertisers don't seem to like them much, either, or at least they don't like them enough to be willing to pay anywhere near the price that they'll pay for ads delivered any other way. And content providers have to be aware that they've made a Faustian bargain. But consider the advertising on a site like knitty.com, which is tasteful and relevant. And it does it using a targeting model that's eminently sane and civilized, namely, placing ads on a site you pick based on knowing that their audience and your target market are one and the same. That's an online advertising model I can get behind.

by staunch 10y ago

Kaedon 10y ago

How do you imagine sites that are ad free would appear? What's their business model? I don't think that's a given, especially since most users won't pay (see the rise of freemium style apps vs paid ones in the app store).

finid 10y ago
Proponents of adblockers are not thinking this thing through. It takes time (that's money) to create quality content that anybody would love reading. Heck, even content that's crappy takes time to create.
- colmvp 10y ago
  I block ads, yet I financially support content creators by voluntarily subscribing to them via Patreon or tip them money (e.g. Twitch streamers). I also subscribe to publications to support journalism. I'm also fine with ads in podcasts since the creators will sometimes at least use the product and it's implemented in a way that's largely expected, e.g. (plug in the beginning, plug in the middle, maybe a plug in the end...)
- nradov 10y ago
  No actually I've thought it through and it wouldn't bother me at all if that content disappears or moves behind a paywall.
- johnpowell 10y ago
  I remember back in 1994. There was actually better quality content back them. Think of half the sites being Ian's Shoelace Site. People that are just really into something and make a site about it. Static HTML sites that were fairly cheap to run. I had a site about all the special tricks in Tony Hawks Pro Skater. It was simple HTML and I got a ton of hits (this was later in 1999). No ads, I just loved the game.
  - finid 10y ago
    There was better quality in 1994 than there is today? Wow! So is that site still up? If not, why did you stop? Too much effort to keep it running?

finid 10y ago

With enough users doing this, new sites that are ad free would quickly replace the old ad driven sites. And how will ad free sites supposed to pay writers to make and keep the site free? There are already a dozen potential solutions waiting for the incentives to change. Go ahead and list them...

bunderbunder 10y ago
My ideal would not be for all sites to go ad free. It would be for advertising to go back to following the model it does everywhere else: Places that sell space for advertising either sell it directly, or go with a 3rd party to handle the advertising, but still maintain some control over what ads are presented, how and when. I have never found ads in buses and trains to be particularly obtrusive, and usually don't find them to be tasteless. Advertising in print media is fine, and oftentimes even useful. Advertising on TV and YouTube is generally tolerable. The only place where ads really become toxic is when they're being served up through ad networks. As far as I can tell, nobody likes them. Users obviously hate them - adblockers are darn near ubiquitous nowadays, and it seems that folks have generally realized that most Web ads have more in common with junk mail and telemarketing than they do with other forms of marketing. Advertisers don't seem to like them much, either, or at least they don't like them enough to be willing to pay anywhere near the price that they'll pay for ads delivered any other way. And content providers have to be aware that they've made a Faustian bargain. But consider the advertising on a site like knitty.com, which is tasteful and relevant. And it does it using a targeting model that's eminently sane and civilized, namely, placing ads on a site you pick based on knowing that their audience and your target market are one and the same. That's an online advertising model I can get behind.