5 ms·

Yup. A friend working at an ad company told me when video playback is disallowed, they stream a series of JPEGS and show them frame-by-frame in sync with web au

Yup. A friend working at an ad company told me when video playback is disallowed, they stream a series of JPEGS and show them frame-by-frame in sync with web audio. I saw it over two years ago. The playback looked stuttery, but it still worked. I know last year Chrome disallowed auto playing web audio, but they probably found a way around that too. Their scripts ran directly on the host's page (not in iframe), so they could probably trigger playback after any mouse event anywhere on the page.

joe_the_user 8y ago
I disable autoplay and it usually works. I close the windows where it doesn't work and that works for the remaining cases. I think the sites trying to do end-runs are generally low-quality and it will be relatively easy to ignore them. Sites like the Atlantic, The New Yorker, and etc don't do end-runs and so disabling makes my experience sooo much better.
- rhizome 8y ago
  There's a massive middle in there of HuffPost, Forbes, and their ilk (each is probably an arm of a content marketing villain such as Demand Media or similar) who will autoplay for you all day long if you want. Maybe even on every story.
babypuncher 8y ago
Why would they go to all this effort? Clearly, this is to play video to users who clearly do NOT want video auto playing. All you accomplish is pissing off the user and wasting your own bandwidth. If I came across a website that did this I would probably never come back.
- Nition 8y ago
  "Sure those users usually hate auto-playing videos, but they'll love our auto-playing videos! We don't want them to miss out!"
- gorbachev 8y ago
  They get paid to deliver videos, no matter what.
  - Malic 8y ago
    This. Too many clients (from an agency perspective) are implicitly given good advice "Your potential customer base isn't interested in this" but someone has to ask "How do we get them to see it anyway?" They have forgotten that potential customers don't have to do business with them. They have options. Time for folks to re-read Seth Godin's "Permission Marketing", it seems.
- ryanmcbride 8y ago
  Marketers for ad companies live in a world of self delusion.
- bunderbunder 8y ago
  The ad companies don't necessarily care about whether or not the ads help their clients' brands. They don't get paid for that. They get paid for other things, like delivering impressions. The site that the ad runs on might care about how this affects reader loyalty, but, if they've decided to go with ad networks, they have rather limited editorial control over what ads the networks choose to run on their sites.
- FridgeSeal 8y ago
  See your misconception here is thinking that any ad company sees you as anything more than just some eyeballs to be ruthlessly mined for money and data. They don’t give a toss how you actually feel about the ad. They don’t care that it’s wasting bandwidth, they’ve got ads to show you and nothing should stand in their way as it’s evidently their divine right because they’re gods gift to the internet.
  - hk__2 8y ago
    > They don’t give a toss how you actually feel about the ad. Of course they do, their money depends on having people engage with those ads.
    - temporalparts 8y ago
      Not necessarily. Impressions are important too. Just because you don't think you noticed that annoying (random example) coca cola ad doesn't mean that it won't unconsciously influence your decision to put that into your tray instead of Pepsi next time you're at the grocery store.
      - mokus 8y ago
        I’m probably in a minority but I consciously and intentionally penalize ads that bypass my psychotic-level blocking. Getting me to notice their ad will cost them, I make sure of it with vindictive fervor.
        throwmeback 8y ago
        Same, I don't understand why more people aren't like this
      - hk__2 8y ago
        Yeah, so they do care about how you feel about the ad. If you associated that ad with bad feelings you might not want to buy that brand next time you see it.
- AriaMinaei 8y ago
  Well, it's not like most visitors have adblock disabled except for websites with annoying ads. So, for those visitors who have adblock, you don't do any more harm by serving annoying ads. For those who don't have adblock, well, you do do harm, but the cost gets spread over the entire ad industry, which is why adblock usage has grown [0]. On the other hand, the money made from serving the annoying ad and getting the impression comes directly to you (and not the industry). In short, benefit is immediate to you. Damage is delayed and doesn't come directly to you. Anyway, I despise this kind of reasoning. ps. People who worked there seemed quite decent. And that somehow showed in part of their biz practices too. E.g. they intentionally refrained from tracking visitors. [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/804008/ad-blocking-reach-usage-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/804008/ad-blocking-reach...
  - dotancohen 8y ago
    This is commonly called tragedy of the commons.
- ConcernedCoder 8y ago
  answer: money
BLKNSLVR 8y ago
What does your friend think of this? This is just more fuel to add to the pro-ad-blocking argument. Ad companies are filth.
- cf498 8y ago
  >Ad companies are filth. To be honest, I am wondering more and more if those aggressive unwanted advertisement are having an impact on peoples behavior and emotional baseline. Similar to road rage. Except you dont always sit in your car, but most of us spend significant parts of their lives in front of screens.
kpcyrd 8y ago
Compile your own video decoder to webassembly and render the video to a canvas.

joe_the_user 8y ago

I disable autoplay and it usually works. I close the windows where it doesn't work and that works for the remaining cases. I think the sites trying to do end-runs are generally low-quality and it will be relatively easy to ignore them. Sites like the Atlantic, The New Yorker, and etc don't do end-runs and so disabling makes my experience sooo much better.

rhizome 8y ago
There's a massive middle in there of HuffPost, Forbes, and their ilk (each is probably an arm of a content marketing villain such as Demand Media or similar) who will autoplay for you all day long if you want. Maybe even on every story.

babypuncher 8y ago

Why would they go to all this effort? Clearly, this is to play video to users who clearly do NOT want video auto playing. All you accomplish is pissing off the user and wasting your own bandwidth. If I came across a website that did this I would probably never come back.

Nition 8y ago
"Sure those users usually hate auto-playing videos, but they'll love our auto-playing videos! We don't want them to miss out!"
gorbachev 8y ago
They get paid to deliver videos, no matter what.
- Malic 8y ago
  This. Too many clients (from an agency perspective) are implicitly given good advice "Your potential customer base isn't interested in this" but someone has to ask "How do we get them to see it anyway?" They have forgotten that potential customers don't have to do business with them. They have options. Time for folks to re-read Seth Godin's "Permission Marketing", it seems.
ryanmcbride 8y ago
Marketers for ad companies live in a world of self delusion.
bunderbunder 8y ago
The ad companies don't necessarily care about whether or not the ads help their clients' brands. They don't get paid for that. They get paid for other things, like delivering impressions. The site that the ad runs on might care about how this affects reader loyalty, but, if they've decided to go with ad networks, they have rather limited editorial control over what ads the networks choose to run on their sites.
FridgeSeal 8y ago
See your misconception here is thinking that any ad company sees you as anything more than just some eyeballs to be ruthlessly mined for money and data. They don’t give a toss how you actually feel about the ad. They don’t care that it’s wasting bandwidth, they’ve got ads to show you and nothing should stand in their way as it’s evidently their divine right because they’re gods gift to the internet.
- hk__2 8y ago
  > They don’t give a toss how you actually feel about the ad. Of course they do, their money depends on having people engage with those ads.
  - temporalparts 8y ago
    Not necessarily. Impressions are important too. Just because you don't think you noticed that annoying (random example) coca cola ad doesn't mean that it won't unconsciously influence your decision to put that into your tray instead of Pepsi next time you're at the grocery store.
    - mokus 8y ago
      I’m probably in a minority but I consciously and intentionally penalize ads that bypass my psychotic-level blocking. Getting me to notice their ad will cost them, I make sure of it with vindictive fervor.
      - throwmeback 8y ago
        Same, I don't understand why more people aren't like this
    - hk__2 8y ago
      Yeah, so they do care about how you feel about the ad. If you associated that ad with bad feelings you might not want to buy that brand next time you see it.
AriaMinaei 8y ago
Well, it's not like most visitors have adblock disabled except for websites with annoying ads. So, for those visitors who have adblock, you don't do any more harm by serving annoying ads. For those who don't have adblock, well, you do do harm, but the cost gets spread over the entire ad industry, which is why adblock usage has grown [0]. On the other hand, the money made from serving the annoying ad and getting the impression comes directly to you (and not the industry). In short, benefit is immediate to you. Damage is delayed and doesn't come directly to you. Anyway, I despise this kind of reasoning. ps. People who worked there seemed quite decent. And that somehow showed in part of their biz practices too. E.g. they intentionally refrained from tracking visitors. [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/804008/ad-blocking-reach-usage-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/804008/ad-blocking-reach...
- dotancohen 8y ago
  This is commonly called tragedy of the commons.
ConcernedCoder 8y ago
answer: money

BLKNSLVR 8y ago

What does your friend think of this? This is just more fuel to add to the pro-ad-blocking argument. Ad companies are filth.

cf498 8y ago
>Ad companies are filth. To be honest, I am wondering more and more if those aggressive unwanted advertisement are having an impact on peoples behavior and emotional baseline. Similar to road rage. Except you dont always sit in your car, but most of us spend significant parts of their lives in front of screens.

kpcyrd 8y ago

Compile your own video decoder to webassembly and render the video to a canvas.