5 ms·

Good. Thread was not released in Europe, I doubt we are missing something huge, except for the huge data harvesting that comes with it. I think about ads and t

by pil0u 3y ago

Good. Thread was not released in Europe, I doubt we are missing something huge, except for the huge data harvesting that comes with it. I think about ads and the whole industry in general, especially in the digital space, as inherently harmful. Thought experiment: what would the humanity miss if we removed the concept of ads entirely?

endisneigh 3y ago
> Thought experiment: what would the humanity miss if we removed the concept of ads entirely? for one you wouldn't be posting on this site since it's literally a marketing device. without targeting advertising you effectively only allow large companies to advertise. I'd say you lose anything you're not paying for explicitly, which is most of the internet.
- hightrix 3y ago
  > I'd say you lose anything you're not paying for explicitly, which is most of the internet. The internet existed before ads and would continue to exist after ads. Trillion dollar companies built on ads served to the internet would not exist, but the internet would.
  - whimsicalism 3y ago
    Vast majority of the internet did not exist prior to ads and removing ads would make its revenue model very difficult. Putting your fingers in your ears and wishing away the problem is not a solution.
- timeon 3y ago
  > which is most of the internet Ads and SEO killed lot of community driven internet. I was active in several of those. We can live without ads.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  > I'd say you lose anything you're not paying for explicitly, which is most of the internet. Oh no. Anyway.
- fulafel 3y ago
  I think HN works as a argument in favour of an ad ban: it's a marketing device, but it's not an ad. This clearly seems like a better outcome for the public than ads.
  - BoxFour 3y ago
    Isn't that even more problematic? Essentially advertisements camouflaged as non-advertising content?
    - Sakos 3y ago
      Except the comments here are open for discussion about what's being advertised. Often you'll see people discussing pros and cons and talking about alternatives. I'll often find something better in the comments than what was actually posted. With how critical the crowd here is, you have to be careful about advertising products here. The Digital Ocean post goes to show how badly you can be eviscerated.
      - BoxFour 3y ago
        The context here is that the entire website itself functions as an unspoken advertisement for YC, not about individuals promoting other things on HN.
  - whimsicalism 3y ago
    Facebook isn’t “an ad” either. HN gives privileges to Y Comb startups. I think the public has no clue what it wants/doesn’t want. They are currently trying to legislate that services are effectively provided to them without any profit-seeking activity. We will see if that works
- _cenw 3y ago
  We can take this further. Corporations usually pay for prime shelf space in retail. That's technically an ad.
dylan604 3y ago
>Thought experiment: what would the humanity miss if we removed the concept of ads entirely? devil's advocate says that everything you consume online without a subscription or other purchase price.
- moate 3y ago
  You're not wrong, but you think too small. Ads existed well before the internet, and are so ingrained in the world at large that as a thought experiment this is up there with "what would we miss if we removed the concept of murder/books/good/etc. entirely". What does "the concept of ads" mean? Is it advertising if I say "I bought a really great hammer from place, you should also get one if you want a great hammer" to a friend? I literally cannot think of a world in which you can only remove ads and not blow up literally every paradigm of how we deal with resources and their distribution.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    why does one assume that because i'm playing devil's advocate means that's how i think? your premise is greatly flawed.
- mostlylurks 3y ago
  Many of the freely available things I consume online are funded by voluntary support from dedicated groups of fans, on patreon etc, and which spread mostly by word of mouth. This requires neither a subscription for the content in question nor any purchase of it. Thus, at least one business model exists which can sustain freely available content without relying on ads, and thus, not all free content would disappear if we banned ads.
- danbruc 3y ago
  Disagree. Watching ads pays for nothing. People buying stuff with some ad budget included in the price is what pays for that content. The entire thing is essentially like a tax collected with everything you buy, then part of the money gets spend to produce ads and run the entire ad industry, the rest is distributed among everyone displaying the ads. Even if I block every ad, I am still paying for them, I am still paying for the content. And if you are getting a subscription to get rid of the ads, then you are actually paying twice - not only directly with your subscription but you are also still paying into all the ad budgets when you buy stuff.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
olalonde 3y ago
Removing ads would disadvantage less affluent people and youth, as many free services like online platforms and social media are funded by advertising. This indirect subsidy from wealthier consumers who buy advertised products would vanish if ads were eliminated. Likely, services would introduce paywalls as an alternative revenue source, making access harder for those unable to pay. Moreover, ads would be replaced by something worse. Without ads, companies would still market their products, but in more covert and potentially deceptive ways. This could lead to less transparency and potentially more manipulative tactics, making it harder for consumers to discern genuine content from promotional material. Journalists would be given free stuff, get invited to parties, there would be product placement everywhere, endorsements, etc.
- danbruc 3y ago
  Companies could just not produce and show ads but keep the ad budget in their prices and keep spending it. Yes, this will of course not work, this will screw up all kinds of incentives, but then lets make it a tax and let the state send a cent every time I visit a website. Free internet services for everyone just like we could do free public transportation. Not sure if this could work and even if then it would probably be more complicated, but I have serious doubts that the ad based system we have right now is the only, best or most efficient system.
- timeon 3y ago
  > replaced by something worse Not if it is regulated. Maybe there would be less online platforms but there would be some community driven as they were before. This mindset that ads are necessary sounds like Stockholm syndrome at best, gaslighting at worst.
  - olalonde 3y ago
    It has more to do about humility than "Stockholhm syndrome" or "gas lighting". Who are we to take away the ad-supported platforms from the people who want them or need them, because they can't afford to pay? Community driven platforms exist today. We don't even need to ban the ad-supported platforms to have them. By the way, I think you may be looking at the past with rosy glass or perhaps didn't live through it. Because advertising on the web used to be a lot more distracting and distasteful. There were popups all over the place, full page animated banner ads, etc.

by pil0u 3y ago

endisneigh 3y ago

> Thought experiment: what would the humanity miss if we removed the concept of ads entirely? for one you wouldn't be posting on this site since it's literally a marketing device. without targeting advertising you effectively only allow large companies to advertise. I'd say you lose anything you're not paying for explicitly, which is most of the internet.

hightrix 3y ago
> I'd say you lose anything you're not paying for explicitly, which is most of the internet. The internet existed before ads and would continue to exist after ads. Trillion dollar companies built on ads served to the internet would not exist, but the internet would.
- whimsicalism 3y ago
  Vast majority of the internet did not exist prior to ads and removing ads would make its revenue model very difficult. Putting your fingers in your ears and wishing away the problem is not a solution.
timeon 3y ago
> which is most of the internet Ads and SEO killed lot of community driven internet. I was active in several of those. We can live without ads.
avgcorrection 3y ago
> I'd say you lose anything you're not paying for explicitly, which is most of the internet. Oh no. Anyway.
fulafel 3y ago
I think HN works as a argument in favour of an ad ban: it's a marketing device, but it's not an ad. This clearly seems like a better outcome for the public than ads.
- BoxFour 3y ago
  Isn't that even more problematic? Essentially advertisements camouflaged as non-advertising content?
  - Sakos 3y ago
    Except the comments here are open for discussion about what's being advertised. Often you'll see people discussing pros and cons and talking about alternatives. I'll often find something better in the comments than what was actually posted. With how critical the crowd here is, you have to be careful about advertising products here. The Digital Ocean post goes to show how badly you can be eviscerated.
    - BoxFour 3y ago
      The context here is that the entire website itself functions as an unspoken advertisement for YC, not about individuals promoting other things on HN.
- whimsicalism 3y ago
  Facebook isn’t “an ad” either. HN gives privileges to Y Comb startups. I think the public has no clue what it wants/doesn’t want. They are currently trying to legislate that services are effectively provided to them without any profit-seeking activity. We will see if that works
_cenw 3y ago
We can take this further. Corporations usually pay for prime shelf space in retail. That's technically an ad.

dylan604 3y ago

>Thought experiment: what would the humanity miss if we removed the concept of ads entirely? devil's advocate says that everything you consume online without a subscription or other purchase price.

moate 3y ago
You're not wrong, but you think too small. Ads existed well before the internet, and are so ingrained in the world at large that as a thought experiment this is up there with "what would we miss if we removed the concept of murder/books/good/etc. entirely". What does "the concept of ads" mean? Is it advertising if I say "I bought a really great hammer from place, you should also get one if you want a great hammer" to a friend? I literally cannot think of a world in which you can only remove ads and not blow up literally every paradigm of how we deal with resources and their distribution.
- dylan604 3y ago
  why does one assume that because i'm playing devil's advocate means that's how i think? your premise is greatly flawed.
mostlylurks 3y ago
Many of the freely available things I consume online are funded by voluntary support from dedicated groups of fans, on patreon etc, and which spread mostly by word of mouth. This requires neither a subscription for the content in question nor any purchase of it. Thus, at least one business model exists which can sustain freely available content without relying on ads, and thus, not all free content would disappear if we banned ads.
danbruc 3y ago
Disagree. Watching ads pays for nothing. People buying stuff with some ad budget included in the price is what pays for that content. The entire thing is essentially like a tax collected with everything you buy, then part of the money gets spend to produce ads and run the entire ad industry, the rest is distributed among everyone displaying the ads. Even if I block every ad, I am still paying for them, I am still paying for the content. And if you are getting a subscription to get rid of the ads, then you are actually paying twice - not only directly with your subscription but you are also still paying into all the ad budgets when you buy stuff.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

olalonde 3y ago

Removing ads would disadvantage less affluent people and youth, as many free services like online platforms and social media are funded by advertising. This indirect subsidy from wealthier consumers who buy advertised products would vanish if ads were eliminated. Likely, services would introduce paywalls as an alternative revenue source, making access harder for those unable to pay. Moreover, ads would be replaced by something worse. Without ads, companies would still market their products, but in more covert and potentially deceptive ways. This could lead to less transparency and potentially more manipulative tactics, making it harder for consumers to discern genuine content from promotional material. Journalists would be given free stuff, get invited to parties, there would be product placement everywhere, endorsements, etc.

danbruc 3y ago
Companies could just not produce and show ads but keep the ad budget in their prices and keep spending it. Yes, this will of course not work, this will screw up all kinds of incentives, but then lets make it a tax and let the state send a cent every time I visit a website. Free internet services for everyone just like we could do free public transportation. Not sure if this could work and even if then it would probably be more complicated, but I have serious doubts that the ad based system we have right now is the only, best or most efficient system.
timeon 3y ago
> replaced by something worse Not if it is regulated. Maybe there would be less online platforms but there would be some community driven as they were before. This mindset that ads are necessary sounds like Stockholm syndrome at best, gaslighting at worst.
- olalonde 3y ago
  It has more to do about humility than "Stockholhm syndrome" or "gas lighting". Who are we to take away the ad-supported platforms from the people who want them or need them, because they can't afford to pay? Community driven platforms exist today. We don't even need to ban the ad-supported platforms to have them. By the way, I think you may be looking at the past with rosy glass or perhaps didn't live through it. Because advertising on the web used to be a lot more distracting and distasteful. There were popups all over the place, full page animated banner ads, etc.