7 ms·

I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. This is their attempt to make advertising work in

I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. This is their attempt to make advertising work in a way that helps everyone. What's the alternative? If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content.

mdekkers 10y ago
What's the alternative? If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content. I understand the problem. I just think that this is a stupid solution. As for content creators getting revenue, how about selling it? Like we used to do?
- news_to_me 10y ago
  Yeah, I agree I don't really see this BAT stuff as the solution, but I do appreciate people trying to find novel solutions. Straight up selling content isn't the solution either, IMO. It would require a huge cultural shift in what the web is, which I don't think people are willing to do. More problematically, if all web content was a la carte paid for, that would lock out lower income people from a ton of information, which seems like a step backward, socially.
uremog 10y ago
Some would stop, some would not. Some would just not do so as their day job. Some would find other ways to get revenue, etc. The "starving artist" trope is plenty real. Low revenue has not stopped them. Whenever someone argues that less content will be produced, I always feel that it just won't be enough reduction for consumers to care. Things like Youtube grew in a climate where being a full-time Youtuber was not possible like it is today.
CodeMage 10y ago
I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. The users have heard that too often. We're all out of trust to give. If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content. If every web user blocked all ads, content creators wouldn't be able to get any revenue from ads. There are other ways of getting revenue. What's the alternative? There's what @libeclipse said in his comment: if you somehow make this tech work in popular browsers, then there are people who might be willing to try it and maybe it becomes the accepted solution. Other than that? Paid content. Yes, that makes it harder for content creators to get money and harder for content consumers to get free content. So what? Are we really so convinced that everyone who creates anything deserves to be paid for it? Do we really need so much free content? More specifically, are we all so convinced of these two things that we're okay with giving up our rights on how to render web content on our own computers? 'Cause that's what it boils down to in the end.
- news_to_me 10y ago
  I just think it's silly to completely throw out the idea of ad-based revenue because currently the ad culture sucks. More paid content? Ok, sure. But what if we could also have ads that didn't suck? I think it's a worthy goal.
  - throwaway2048 10y ago
    The nature of ads is to be hostile and misleading to the people viewing them. Their purpose is to drive demand where none previously existed, they are at odds with the user.
    - news_to_me 10y ago
      That's a simplistic viewpoint. If ads weren't useful at all, no one would click on them, or, if they did, they wouldn't buy whatever was at the other end. There is such a thing as artificially inflated demand, which can be a problem, but I don't think it's likely that all advertising falls in that bucket.
      - kwhitefoot 10y ago
        It would be interesting to have some examples of ads that you regard as not falling in that bucket.
    - beaconstudios 10y ago
      the main legitimate purpose of ads is to make people aware of products they didn't know about before. If the user actually wants that product but didn't know it existed, then the advert was a net-positive to both parties.
  - CodeMage 10y ago
    Why? I really don't understand why people think that ads of all things need saving. I understand the desire to make money flow towards the content creators. I understand the desire for free content. I understand that the ads seem to "solve" both of those problems. I just don't understand why people think it's better to keep investing our time and energy into trying to save ads instead of looking for alternative solutions. So why ads?
adrianN 10y ago
The internet was pretty nice in the era of hobbyist websites that were linked by webrings. You don't have to make money to create content. Maybe it would reduce all the clickbait if there were no money to be made.
- pinebox 10y ago
  A thousand times this! People who fear an internet without advertising obviously were not cognizant when the internet did not have advertising. The only down side I remember is that we only had one Mr. T fan page.
Kalium 10y ago
> I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. It's a great idea! I completely agree. If advertising on the web respected users and users could trust that they would be respected, users wouldn't feel the need to block ads. With that said, it's possible that perhaps users have trusted this precise pitch in the past. In general, money has proven corrosive to respect, and ad-blockers stage a comeback as a result. > What's the alternative? If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content. Make something good enough that I want to pay for it. This isn't ridiculous or a pipe dream. I pay for The Economist and Nautilus because they are worth it to me.
- news_to_me 10y ago
  It's a little difficult because there are a lot of publications that I'd like to read a few articles from, but not enough to warrant a subscription. Micro-payments seems like an interesting solution to this, but I haven't seen it fully worked out. Right now, advertising serves this niche. I don't really see the need to trust advertisers in Brave's scheme here, either. You need to trust the browser to judge which ads are acceptable, but alternatively you need to trust the ad blocker to know which things are ads.
  - Kalium 10y ago
    Micropayments, as a rule, don't work because there's too much friction. Subscriptions work because there's a single point of friction once.
brownbat 10y ago
> I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. True and more than this, advertising could be a service to me. Advertising has multiple functions. One is helping with discovery. Users have some problem they don't know someone is solving. Another is branding. Shove brand recognition down people's throats until they automatically reach for your product. I use friends to discover new products and services, because they provide reliable suggestions and don't water down their reputation through brand building. I was excited for the targeted ads movement, because of what it promised. I really want a recommendation engine that is smarter than everyone I know. That would be amazing. It's a giant world with lots of startups and makers, surely my monkey brain cannot possibly know enough people to track every one of these. So I'm ready, have the grand AI tell me what people are making and how it helps my life! In practice, they didn't deliver. Targeted ads are like an idiot savant. I basically just get recommendations to buy whatever I just bought, even if that makes no sense. (You just bought a blender, why don't you buy two of them so you can have one on every counter!?) It's the simplest logic that would work on a plurality of sales. Most people who buy paper towels later buy them again. Ok, new rule: people like buying what they just bought. No exceptions, logic done. I know incredibly smart people work on targeted ads, so I can't imagine they're missing this. My best guess is that there's too much low hanging fruit to improve a recommendation engine, or that the other lucrative aspects of advertising (brand building) chase out any funding or development for a 100% user-interest focused ad-engine, er, recommendation-engine for products. So I actually respect the impossible bar that BAT sets for itself. If we have an advertising system people will actually install a browser for (or pay a monthly subscription for), then we will have fixed advertising. Not before. It's a good finish line. Whoever can cross it definitely wins.
djKianoosh 10y ago
> make advertising work in a way that helps everyone. Right here is where it all falls apart. There _is no_ way.

mdekkers 10y ago

What's the alternative? If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content. I understand the problem. I just think that this is a stupid solution. As for content creators getting revenue, how about selling it? Like we used to do?

news_to_me 10y ago
Yeah, I agree I don't really see this BAT stuff as the solution, but I do appreciate people trying to find novel solutions. Straight up selling content isn't the solution either, IMO. It would require a huge cultural shift in what the web is, which I don't think people are willing to do. More problematically, if all web content was a la carte paid for, that would lock out lower income people from a ton of information, which seems like a step backward, socially.

uremog 10y ago

Some would stop, some would not. Some would just not do so as their day job. Some would find other ways to get revenue, etc. The "starving artist" trope is plenty real. Low revenue has not stopped them. Whenever someone argues that less content will be produced, I always feel that it just won't be enough reduction for consumers to care. Things like Youtube grew in a climate where being a full-time Youtuber was not possible like it is today.

CodeMage 10y ago

I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. The users have heard that too often. We're all out of trust to give. If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content. If every web user blocked all ads, content creators wouldn't be able to get any revenue from ads. There are other ways of getting revenue. What's the alternative? There's what @libeclipse said in his comment: if you somehow make this tech work in popular browsers, then there are people who might be willing to try it and maybe it becomes the accepted solution. Other than that? Paid content. Yes, that makes it harder for content creators to get money and harder for content consumers to get free content. So what? Are we really so convinced that everyone who creates anything deserves to be paid for it? Do we really need so much free content? More specifically, are we all so convinced of these two things that we're okay with giving up our rights on how to render web content on our own computers? 'Cause that's what it boils down to in the end.

news_to_me 10y ago
I just think it's silly to completely throw out the idea of ad-based revenue because currently the ad culture sucks. More paid content? Ok, sure. But what if we could also have ads that didn't suck? I think it's a worthy goal.
- throwaway2048 10y ago
  The nature of ads is to be hostile and misleading to the people viewing them. Their purpose is to drive demand where none previously existed, they are at odds with the user.
  - news_to_me 10y ago
    That's a simplistic viewpoint. If ads weren't useful at all, no one would click on them, or, if they did, they wouldn't buy whatever was at the other end. There is such a thing as artificially inflated demand, which can be a problem, but I don't think it's likely that all advertising falls in that bucket.
    - kwhitefoot 10y ago
      It would be interesting to have some examples of ads that you regard as not falling in that bucket.
  - beaconstudios 10y ago
    the main legitimate purpose of ads is to make people aware of products they didn't know about before. If the user actually wants that product but didn't know it existed, then the advert was a net-positive to both parties.
- CodeMage 10y ago
  Why? I really don't understand why people think that ads of all things need saving. I understand the desire to make money flow towards the content creators. I understand the desire for free content. I understand that the ads seem to "solve" both of those problems. I just don't understand why people think it's better to keep investing our time and energy into trying to save ads instead of looking for alternative solutions. So why ads?

adrianN 10y ago

The internet was pretty nice in the era of hobbyist websites that were linked by webrings. You don't have to make money to create content. Maybe it would reduce all the clickbait if there were no money to be made.

pinebox 10y ago
A thousand times this! People who fear an internet without advertising obviously were not cognizant when the internet did not have advertising. The only down side I remember is that we only had one Mr. T fan page.

Kalium 10y ago

> I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. It's a great idea! I completely agree. If advertising on the web respected users and users could trust that they would be respected, users wouldn't feel the need to block ads. With that said, it's possible that perhaps users have trusted this precise pitch in the past. In general, money has proven corrosive to respect, and ad-blockers stage a comeback as a result. > What's the alternative? If every web user blocked all ads, content creators couldn't get any revenue and would stop making content. Make something good enough that I want to pay for it. This isn't ridiculous or a pipe dream. I pay for The Economist and Nautilus because they are worth it to me.

news_to_me 10y ago
It's a little difficult because there are a lot of publications that I'd like to read a few articles from, but not enough to warrant a subscription. Micro-payments seems like an interesting solution to this, but I haven't seen it fully worked out. Right now, advertising serves this niche. I don't really see the need to trust advertisers in Brave's scheme here, either. You need to trust the browser to judge which ads are acceptable, but alternatively you need to trust the ad blocker to know which things are ads.
- Kalium 10y ago
  Micropayments, as a rule, don't work because there's too much friction. Subscriptions work because there's a single point of friction once.

brownbat 10y ago

> I think the idea is that if advertising on the web respected users, they wouldn't feel the need to block ads. True and more than this, advertising could be a service to me. Advertising has multiple functions. One is helping with discovery. Users have some problem they don't know someone is solving. Another is branding. Shove brand recognition down people's throats until they automatically reach for your product. I use friends to discover new products and services, because they provide reliable suggestions and don't water down their reputation through brand building. I was excited for the targeted ads movement, because of what it promised. I really want a recommendation engine that is smarter than everyone I know. That would be amazing. It's a giant world with lots of startups and makers, surely my monkey brain cannot possibly know enough people to track every one of these. So I'm ready, have the grand AI tell me what people are making and how it helps my life! In practice, they didn't deliver. Targeted ads are like an idiot savant. I basically just get recommendations to buy whatever I just bought, even if that makes no sense. (You just bought a blender, why don't you buy two of them so you can have one on every counter!?) It's the simplest logic that would work on a plurality of sales. Most people who buy paper towels later buy them again. Ok, new rule: people like buying what they just bought. No exceptions, logic done. I know incredibly smart people work on targeted ads, so I can't imagine they're missing this. My best guess is that there's too much low hanging fruit to improve a recommendation engine, or that the other lucrative aspects of advertising (brand building) chase out any funding or development for a 100% user-interest focused ad-engine, er, recommendation-engine for products. So I actually respect the impossible bar that BAT sets for itself. If we have an advertising system people will actually install a browser for (or pay a monthly subscription for), then we will have fixed advertising. Not before. It's a good finish line. Whoever can cross it definitely wins.

djKianoosh 10y ago

> make advertising work in a way that helps everyone. Right here is where it all falls apart. There _is no_ way.