1. 19
  1.  

  2. 15

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!

    Whenever someone tells me how ads can be contextually relevant and enhance the user experience I know they either work for big ad-tech (google/facebook) or they are getting checks from an ad network.

    1. 5

      I worked for in ad tech for quite a while and yes, they can be contextually relevant. But the process is akin to pointing a shotgun with wide spread into some direction, making some heavily biased assumptions and hoping you increase rates in a very, very specific scenario. The problem is that pretty often, the context is nothing you can extract anything out of (what’s the contextual buying impulse of someone reading articles about Syria?).

      Oh, and the UX thing? Bullshit.

      1. 2

        The YouTube app for Android keeps giving me ads for apps that I’ve already installed and used. If Google can’t figure it out then either it’s not worth it to them, or it’s really hard to do so..

      2. 14

        Why should the ad tech industry be allowed to do anything other than serve images? They’ve proven they cannot guarantee the integrity of their ads.

        This seems to be a recurring theme of the web: this technology is novel, therefore it is good if we use it more and more.

        1. 4

          Please, plain text.

          1. 1

            Please, no ads. Just high quality content.

            1. 5

              And do it for free, so it can compete with advert-sponsored content /s

        2. 5

          “Malvertising” is a de-facto malapropism for “served by google [ad exchange]”, and author using “free” hosting by Blogspot/Google. What a laugh.

          1. 5

            author using “free” hosting by Blogspot/Google

            Quoted for emphasis.

            If people stopped depending on the teat of ad giants to do everything, maybe things wouldn’t be so bad. As it is, well…

          2. 6

            As ads are fundamentally hostile anyway, there’s no way around ad blocks. Maybe once they are widespread enough, people will come up with different business models.

            1. 5

              ads are fundamentally hostile anyway

              With that principle, I disagree strongly.

              In practice, I hate ads. I hate when websites perform poorly because of stupid graphics, and I hate having my flow interrupted by some stupid pop-up that expands to half my screen. I hate unsolicited audio. The way the advertising industries behave is repugnant.

              However, I think that it’s incorrect to say that ads are fundamentally hostile. A more efficient market for information is good for everyone. Advertising has a role to play. It has exceeded its rightful role, no doubt, largely because people want free things and because the advertising industry seems to believe that intrusiveness works (and it just might). I don’t think that it’s an inherently evil business, though.

              1. 10

                I don’t think advertising adds any information, with maybe the exception of specifically requested ads (i.e. newsletters you subscribed to). Everything else is mostly trying to generate a desire to buy that wasn’t there before and would never have been there if you hadn’t seen the ad.

                1. 7

                  It’s good to have informed consumers who make rational choices, but the ad industry has always aimed to create uninformed and misinformed customers who make irrational choices. I’d say they haven’t exceeded their rightful role so much as they’ve deliberately done the opposite. So while it’s theoretically possible for ads to have a useful role, advertising has been fundamentally hostile in practice for as long as it’s been an industry.

                  1. 1

                    the ad industry has always aimed to create uninformed and misinformed customers who make irrational choices. I’d say they haven’t exceeded their rightful role so much as they’ve deliberately done the opposite.

                    With that, I agree.

              2. 5

                I don’t see why the Ad-tech industry must do anything, especially something that hurts them.

                1. 1

                  Seriously lol. It’s an externality that the ad industry would rather people not think about. Voters, consumers, regulators… these are the ones to make them own up to an externality. Within the present rules, they are doing things in the way that they believe makes them most money. Exactly what we should expect.

                  Meanwhile, let the ad blocking, sandboxing, or dedicated machines for hostile sites continue to handle the problem.

                2. 1

                  “Powered by blogger.”

                  If you really believe the ad-tech industry’s product is dangerous, maybe an ad-supported company’s product isn’t the best platform to blog from. Unless people vote with their feet, nothing’s going to change.