4 ms·

Preach. I don't consent to tracking. I don't want my browser helping anyone track me in any way. I don't want to be pressured and manipulated into buying things

Preach. I don't consent to tracking. I don't want my browser helping anyone track me in any way. I don't want to be pressured and manipulated into buying things I don't need. Advertising is not moral and I owe nothing to anyone who tries to manipulate me. Websites can move to more efficient and lighter methods of delivery to cover the absence of advertising revenue. Anyone skilled who works in the advertising industry is freed to offer his skills to better human endeavours. Everyone wins.

somethingAlex 6y ago
What do you mean by "more efficient and lighter methods of delivery?"
- HeckFeck 6y ago
  Plainer HTML and very little Javascript which will reduce development and running costs. As witness, this very website. It supplies all that is necessary and no more. It is very successful. With harmful incentives removed, this would encourage websites to focus on good writing and less on being 'content farms' to drive up engagement for the advertisers. All I want from most sites is the text. Not adverts, trackers and those damnable autoplaying videos that jump out and follow me down the page. I use the reader mode in most cases. Why is it necessary to use reader mode if not to cut the useless cruft? Why can't the web just be like that?
calvinmorrison 6y ago
Most cost is producing content, not hosting.
throwaway3699 6y ago
> Anyone skilled who works in the advertising industry is freed to offer his skills to better human endeavours. I don't want to be rude, but won't they just end up losing their livelihoods? If the advertising industry goes, most programmers will see their salaries drop hugely. Even those not working in advertising will see a drop due to the flood of supply.
- int_19h 6y ago
  This sounds suspiciously like the argument that coal mining should continue so as to preserve coal-miner jobs.
  - leephillips 6y ago
    I like this analogy. Why should I be concerned about the collapse of an industry whose dominant effect is to make the world a worse place? Especially if, as in advertising, that effect is the intended outcome, rather than an externality, as in coal production.
  - vehemenz 6y ago
    Or like the prison guard union defending the drug war.
- jefftk 6y ago
  Eh. I work in advertising as a programmer, and if advertising were banned there would still be lots of other programming work I could do. (I do think advertising is net positive and prohibiting it would be a bad idea: https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising)
  - MomoXenosaga 6y ago
    I block ads and I still buy things. The world won't collapse if advertising is curtailed. Consumer habits will just become more unpredictable- and small companies could compete with big companies that spend billions on marketing.
    - throwaway3699 6y ago
      I don't agree. The more likely outcome would be complete domination of big brands because they own the mindshare (e.g. people will remember Amazon.co.uk, they will not remember hundreds of small businesses too). Even if you were not directly influenced by advertising, you probably were indirectly through word of mouth.

somethingAlex 6y ago

What do you mean by "more efficient and lighter methods of delivery?"

HeckFeck 6y ago
Plainer HTML and very little Javascript which will reduce development and running costs. As witness, this very website. It supplies all that is necessary and no more. It is very successful. With harmful incentives removed, this would encourage websites to focus on good writing and less on being 'content farms' to drive up engagement for the advertisers. All I want from most sites is the text. Not adverts, trackers and those damnable autoplaying videos that jump out and follow me down the page. I use the reader mode in most cases. Why is it necessary to use reader mode if not to cut the useless cruft? Why can't the web just be like that?

calvinmorrison 6y ago

Most cost is producing content, not hosting.

throwaway3699 6y ago

> Anyone skilled who works in the advertising industry is freed to offer his skills to better human endeavours. I don't want to be rude, but won't they just end up losing their livelihoods? If the advertising industry goes, most programmers will see their salaries drop hugely. Even those not working in advertising will see a drop due to the flood of supply.

int_19h 6y ago
This sounds suspiciously like the argument that coal mining should continue so as to preserve coal-miner jobs.
- leephillips 6y ago
  I like this analogy. Why should I be concerned about the collapse of an industry whose dominant effect is to make the world a worse place? Especially if, as in advertising, that effect is the intended outcome, rather than an externality, as in coal production.
- vehemenz 6y ago
  Or like the prison guard union defending the drug war.
jefftk 6y ago
Eh. I work in advertising as a programmer, and if advertising were banned there would still be lots of other programming work I could do. (I do think advertising is net positive and prohibiting it would be a bad idea: https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising)
- MomoXenosaga 6y ago
  I block ads and I still buy things. The world won't collapse if advertising is curtailed. Consumer habits will just become more unpredictable- and small companies could compete with big companies that spend billions on marketing.
  - throwaway3699 6y ago
    I don't agree. The more likely outcome would be complete domination of big brands because they own the mindshare (e.g. people will remember Amazon.co.uk, they will not remember hundreds of small businesses too). Even if you were not directly influenced by advertising, you probably were indirectly through word of mouth.