8 ms·
It's funny that Google is so large, that one way to grow their business is to improve the user experience of the internet as a whole.
by tschellenbach 6y ago
It's funny that Google is so large, that one way to grow their business is to improve the user experience of the internet as a whole.
- monadic2 6y agoIf this were true chrome would ship with ad block and they would accept cold hard cash for their services.
- verdverm 6y agoI tried this, I used it, no big adoption, product got killed. Largely people prefer the free perception of the internet and wouldn't pay the prices it would cost if direct payments were made. I believe its in the $x00s per year
- monadic2 6y ago> Largely people prefer the free perception of the internet You have any reasoning behind this or are you taking the people who killed the product at face value? If I were to guess that product (i have no idea to what you’re referring) was designed to fail, like youtube premium.
- reaperducer 6y agoThey tried this, I used it, no big adoption, product got killed. To which service do you refer?
- GuB-42 6y agoGoogle Chrome already ships with an ad blocker (it is in the "site settings"). It is, however, very weak. I think Google would love to block ads more aggressively, but the conflict of interest is so obvious it is going to be raining lawsuits the instant they do that.
- ocdtrekkie 6y agoA more aggressive ad blocker would block Google's primary source of revenue. So no, they have no interest in shipping an ad blocker akin to others.
- monadic2 6y agoIt really makes me wonder what the internet would be like if google had built microtransactions into a browser to support their sites instead, or as a complement to ads (e.g. an advertiser can pay for your time on the site in exchange for an ad, and google would only middleman the ad negotiation, not the transaction).
- s17n 6y agoExactly the way it looks today, because most people aren't willing to pay for content.
- millstone 6y agoI think the surreptitious tracking is the real problem. I don't mind ads on podcasts, because their tracking is explicit and opt-in ("enter our show's promo code on the sponsor's product page.") Likewise Google Contributor did not reduce tracking, which is why I never signed up.
- franze 6y agoThere is no way that anybody would see /amp as improving the user experience of the internet as a whole other than an "product management by KPI" dumbed down organization.
- jeffbee 6y agoAMP is a huge, huge improvement over the sites that it was intended to help: local news sites that are unusable, tab-crashing, malware-infested swamps. I don't know what their problem is, but they are like drug addicts and AMP is their rehab. Without AMP these sites are simply useless.
- s17n 6y agoI see amp as improving the user experience of the internet as a whole. Amp sites aren't amazing, but they are usually better than the alternative.
- amelius 6y ago> Google is so large, that one way to grow their business is to improve the user experience of the internet as a whole. (where user = advertiser)
- verdverm 6y agoUser == user Advertiser == 0.6 * customer Their revenues are increasingly diversified, Google received far more dollars from myself and company via non ad revenues, more than $1000 / month now and growing (re: gcloud)
- TeMPOraL 6y agoUser == user, in the sense of a drug user. Hooked up, can't say no, will suffer through almost anything, and is a disposable commodity from the supplier's POV.