5 ms·

I completely agree. I don't care if your ad is clever, relevant, organically sourced, environmentally friendly, necessary for financing your product, something

by enlyth 7y ago

I completely agree. I don't care if your ad is clever, relevant, organically sourced, environmentally friendly, necessary for financing your product, something I actually want, need, or didn't know I wanted yet. The internet is plagued with this cancer everywhere you go, no matter what you do. Somehow it's become acceptable that every second of our attention and time is competed for by corporations trying to sell us things. I simply do not want to see ads, ever.

jimmaswell 7y ago
I don't understand this overreaction. Ads are there, so what, they don't even make noise or tend to cover parts of the screen like they used to.
- jordanpg 7y ago
  The point is that I'm fundamentally disgusted by an incitement to spend money being thrust in front of me in any form, for any reason. I see it as exactly at odds with what I'm trying to do with my life and my attention. I do not consent to have my time and attention taken from me in this way. Yes, I am a free rider on much of the internet today, such as it is. That the entire internet is based on this absurd proposition is a symptom of its rapid growth and industries going after the lowest hanging fruit. I am confident that the internet will find another way forward.
- _Understated_ 7y ago
  You need to look at what powers the ads. It's never "just" an ad. Like the way you see an ad in a newspaper. It's the spyware that comes with it and the fact that tons of them are animated! And yes, I consider it spyware and virus-like behaviour to track me wherever I go and I will actively do what I can to stop it. Even if it means you don't get paid... you chose that seedy medium to make money, not me. It's not my job to validate your business model. By all means block me. I will go elsewhere. Browsing the internet without an ad blocker is actually impossible for me now... whenever I rebuild a machine I have those few hours or so before I get the ad blocker installed where the internet is a horrific assault on the senses with everything trying to steal my attention away from the thing I am there to see and slowing down the page load (significantly in some cases) I still remember when plenty of the internet was running fine from hobbyists and whatnot without resorting to ads and tracking... it costs practically zero to run a website (granted, at scale it's a whole other ball-game but how many people have that problem?) The internet would survive fine without ads. It would have a different mix of behemoths and hobbyists sites but it would survive just fine. That being said... I do remember trying to punch the monkey to win :D Edit: added stuff for clarity
- RobertKerans 7y ago
  The ones under discussion are the digital equivalent of junk mail
mathnmusic 7y ago
To jimmaswell: Ads wouldn't be there unless they work for the advertiser.
- onion2k 7y ago
  Unless the advertiser mistakenly believes they work.
Xixi 7y ago
I used to feel that way, until I built several services (the latest being tomotcha.com). Turns out, once you've built something, you need to advertise its existence out there. I mean "advertise" in the largest meaning of the word, not only paid for advertisement on Google/Facebook/Twitter/Criteo. That includes writing blog posts for people to stumble upon, talk about it on Hacker News, send samples to reviewers, etc. How else would people learn about it? Turns out, if you don't talk about it, very few will come... I think this is why HN has a lot more goodwill towards self promotion (Show HN style posts) than a lot of other communities (reddit notably, depending on the sub). Entrepreneurs know that advertisement is a necessary part of any business.
- wolco 7y ago
  I think people confuse advertising in general with the 360 tracking facebook/google and others use. People need to advertise and it's helpful to both the consumer/company.
  - frenchy 7y ago
    I'm not sure that people confused the two, it's just that the intrusive forms of advertising make up an overwhelmingly large part of a normal person's interactions with ads that we all just assume that that is what you're talking about. I think we mostly appreciate the need for the so-called "getting the word out there", but it ought to be done in way that's appropriate. There's a balance to be made between the potential value of a product, and the amount of attention you're trying to steal. Most people think the products they make are more valuable than they really are.
HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago
Vivaldi (Chromium-based browser, built for power users) has a set of default home page spots that companies paid to get a spot on. They are removable, and are a sorta one-time thing. They help pay for development, and are rather non-intrusive. Is that acceptable? What about a set of sponsor logos at the bottom of a webpage that let you visit the companies?
hombre_fatal 7y ago
The take-away here is to just buy covert ads that you confuse for content. It's win-win. You get to think you're not seeing ads, and advertisers get to advertise in unblockable ways.
- frenchy 7y ago
  I don't really have a problem with that. If you're making content, and it's valuable, and it's related to a product, that's great. If your content isn't valuable to me, then I won't bother with it. If you're just getting folks on facebook to promote your products in the hope of some minor dispensation or something (a popular gimic these days). That's easily identifiable and blockable.

by enlyth 7y ago

jimmaswell 7y ago

I don't understand this overreaction. Ads are there, so what, they don't even make noise or tend to cover parts of the screen like they used to.

jordanpg 7y ago
The point is that I'm fundamentally disgusted by an incitement to spend money being thrust in front of me in any form, for any reason. I see it as exactly at odds with what I'm trying to do with my life and my attention. I do not consent to have my time and attention taken from me in this way. Yes, I am a free rider on much of the internet today, such as it is. That the entire internet is based on this absurd proposition is a symptom of its rapid growth and industries going after the lowest hanging fruit. I am confident that the internet will find another way forward.
_Understated_ 7y ago
You need to look at what powers the ads. It's never "just" an ad. Like the way you see an ad in a newspaper. It's the spyware that comes with it and the fact that tons of them are animated! And yes, I consider it spyware and virus-like behaviour to track me wherever I go and I will actively do what I can to stop it. Even if it means you don't get paid... you chose that seedy medium to make money, not me. It's not my job to validate your business model. By all means block me. I will go elsewhere. Browsing the internet without an ad blocker is actually impossible for me now... whenever I rebuild a machine I have those few hours or so before I get the ad blocker installed where the internet is a horrific assault on the senses with everything trying to steal my attention away from the thing I am there to see and slowing down the page load (significantly in some cases) I still remember when plenty of the internet was running fine from hobbyists and whatnot without resorting to ads and tracking... it costs practically zero to run a website (granted, at scale it's a whole other ball-game but how many people have that problem?) The internet would survive fine without ads. It would have a different mix of behemoths and hobbyists sites but it would survive just fine. That being said... I do remember trying to punch the monkey to win :D Edit: added stuff for clarity
RobertKerans 7y ago
The ones under discussion are the digital equivalent of junk mail

mathnmusic 7y ago

To jimmaswell: Ads wouldn't be there unless they work for the advertiser.

onion2k 7y ago
Unless the advertiser mistakenly believes they work.

Xixi 7y ago

I used to feel that way, until I built several services (the latest being tomotcha.com). Turns out, once you've built something, you need to advertise its existence out there. I mean "advertise" in the largest meaning of the word, not only paid for advertisement on Google/Facebook/Twitter/Criteo. That includes writing blog posts for people to stumble upon, talk about it on Hacker News, send samples to reviewers, etc. How else would people learn about it? Turns out, if you don't talk about it, very few will come... I think this is why HN has a lot more goodwill towards self promotion (Show HN style posts) than a lot of other communities (reddit notably, depending on the sub). Entrepreneurs know that advertisement is a necessary part of any business.

wolco 7y ago
I think people confuse advertising in general with the 360 tracking facebook/google and others use. People need to advertise and it's helpful to both the consumer/company.
- frenchy 7y ago
  I'm not sure that people confused the two, it's just that the intrusive forms of advertising make up an overwhelmingly large part of a normal person's interactions with ads that we all just assume that that is what you're talking about. I think we mostly appreciate the need for the so-called "getting the word out there", but it ought to be done in way that's appropriate. There's a balance to be made between the potential value of a product, and the amount of attention you're trying to steal. Most people think the products they make are more valuable than they really are.

HeWhoLurksLate 7y ago

Vivaldi (Chromium-based browser, built for power users) has a set of default home page spots that companies paid to get a spot on. They are removable, and are a sorta one-time thing. They help pay for development, and are rather non-intrusive. Is that acceptable? What about a set of sponsor logos at the bottom of a webpage that let you visit the companies?

hombre_fatal 7y ago

The take-away here is to just buy covert ads that you confuse for content. It's win-win. You get to think you're not seeing ads, and advertisers get to advertise in unblockable ways.

frenchy 7y ago
I don't really have a problem with that. If you're making content, and it's valuable, and it's related to a product, that's great. If your content isn't valuable to me, then I won't bother with it. If you're just getting folks on facebook to promote your products in the hope of some minor dispensation or something (a popular gimic these days). That's easily identifiable and blockable.