A world without ad's

[second exodous]

Say goodbye to television and say goodbye to 99% of freely available Internet content (Youtube, Sourceforge, etc.)

Oh come on, that is a bunch of B freaking S, you honestly believe that?


Lets take TV first. I PAY FOR TV THROUGH SATELLITE, WHY THE FREAK DO I HAVE TO WATCH ADS!!! Only PBS should be put free over the air and maybe a channel for news, the news channel might be able to have ads. I hate TV news anyway, trash, just do news through print.


Internet hosting is dirt cheap, I have a friend that used to have a web hosting company and he had to close it down because it just wasn't worth it to him dropping prices so low. Anyone can tell you that, even a site that gets millions of hits doesn't cost much to host. Downloads can be done with P2P, let the users pay the bill.


Ads on the net are there because people are GREEDY, not because it is expensive to host. There are sites that need to pay staff but they should have sponsors that don't have whack the monkey or things following my pointer around or pop up ads. 99.9% of the ads on the Internet are not needed, the other .1% don't need to have me whacking monkeys or have things following me around. They shouldn't even be animated, they should be static pictures or text ads.


I know people will argue with this but if we needs ads then we need to change the Internet. Ads on my Sattilite TV just sucks, does not make any sense. I'd pay for specific channels if it meant no ads on those channels. I'd pay for individual episodes I like if it wasn't for the DRM.

 

[Patrick R Ludvigsen]

Particularly, a huge chunk of website ads lead to malicious software, even on otherwise reputable websites. The ad companies need to be rehauled.

 

[slaeshjag]

Internet hosting is dirt cheap, I have a friend that used to have a web hosting company and he had to close it down because it just wasn't worth it to him dropping prices so low. Anyone can tell you that, even a site that gets millions of hits doesn't cost much to host. Downloads can be done with P2P, let the users pay the bill.


Ads on the net are there because people are GREEDY, not because it is expensive to host. There are sites that need to pay staff but they should have sponsors that don't have whack the monkey or things following my pointer around or pop up ads. 99.9% of the ads on the Internet are not needed, the other .1% don't need to have me whacking monkeys or have things following me around. They shouldn't even be animated, they should be static pictures or text ads.

I got a friend who owns a filehosting site, it is *not* cheap to host

 

[Asiyura]

[…]

I'm not on facebook. I never was.

I am but I regret it constantly.

Same case here.


Was it because of your girlfriend?


I pay lots of money to have TV, internet and phone, and on these three communication mediums, I get more ads than true content.


I've got a pretty good hosting for only 120$ per year, bandwidth, disk space and other things unlimited.


I host a forum for my schoolmates on it, I never asked them to pay anything, I just added a small image to my signature with a link for donations.


And those donations are automatically sent to my hosting.

 

[Caine]

So I would say companies should be able to rely only on 'word of mouth'.

You could call that third party advertisements.


What's wrong with spreading the word about your products (assuming you're not lying/deceiving)?

 

[Blue Protoman]

Nothing, if you do it tastefully. If you're in people's faces about it, that's another story.

 

[fraseyboy]

I have nothing wrong with advertisements. It's usually pretty easy to tell which ones are lying/being misleading and a lot of the time they can be helpful and informative. Plus they're not THAT difficult to ignore. It's a small price to pay for free services.

 

[Tickles]

...I PAY FOR TV THROUGH SATELLITE, WHY THE FREAK DO I HAVE TO WATCH ADS!!!...

Oh yeah I was going to raise this. When you're paying a subscription you shouldn't have to watch ads, certainly not in the middle of a show. In the UK Sky at least screen their movies ad free (at least they used to, I got rid of it a while ago), but this should extend to all their subscription channels.


I can't believe they get away with charging you a fortune and then shoving ads down your throat. :angry:

 

[Prometheus]

^ I'm pretty sure that the subscription fees would never get anywhere near paying money to all of those channels.

 

[tsh]

I watch almost all of my TV offline (with myth), and rarely see the adverts - they auto skip quite well. Adverts only work because enough people take notice of them - but I'm not sure I understand the economics - if we didn't have adverts, would stuff be cheaper?


Interestingly, my facebook news feed has quite a lot of user-generated advertising for events and things that are run by friends of friends. I guess that a lot of people like adverts...

 

[Tickles]

^ I'm pretty sure that the subscription fees would never get anywhere near paying money to all of those channels.

I was referring more to their own channels that screen the shows they themselves advertise heavily, rather than the filler like the Cats In Hats channel

 

[Prometheus]

^ Aha, I see. :lol: (Also, that's one of the funniest names I've heard for the filler junk in years.)

 

[lulzfish]

I am (on Facebook) but I regret it constantly.

Same case here.


Was it because of your girlfriend?


I pay lots of money to have TV, internet and phone, and on these three communication mediums, I get more ads than true content.


I've got a pretty good hosting for only 120$ per year, bandwidth, disk space and other things unlimited.


I host a forum for my schoolmates on it, I never asked them to pay anything, I just added a small image to my signature with a link for donations.


And those donations are automatically sent to my hosting.

Nah, I just had a lot of acquaintances (I don't know where other people set the bar for "friend" but I rarely talk to these people IRL) in high school and college who used it.


I want to switch to Diaspora but I haven't done the research to see if it's worth setting up.


And due to some weird shit, I have slower Internet now, so I can't really invite my friends to use it, or it would saturate my upload and break everything.

 

[Klaue]

I see ads as a neccessary evil. Sure, web-hosting is cheap today, but some people would like to earn something for what they provide. Others have other problems with it - I for example made some niche programs (nothing that would be of interest for the people here) and put them on the internet for free. I use a free-hoster that works by putting ads on 404-pages, not because hosting money would be too much for me, but just because I have a philosophical problem with the whole "paying so other people can get your stuff for free". I'm pretty sure I'm not the only dev who thinks that way.


The donation method would fall flat too. While it may (or may not) work in todays web, it would probably not work if every website would rely on it. The percentage of donating visitors is low enough as it is even today.


The only other way I can think of it working without ads is either a distributed network in the same way as freenet (everyone is a hoster for everyones work) or by pay-per-access methods. The former makes for slow internet and the latter is worse than ads in my opinion (how many of you have an account for one of the "you have to pay to see an article older than a week" news papers?)


The way it works today is, in my opinion, preferable. Most people just put up with ads, generating the revenue, but if you know how, there's a pretty easy way around it (adblock, noscript) that may be slightly annoying getting used to, for example, with noscript, you have to unblock every flash game/video you want to watch or the full site it's hosted on, but in the end works out.


I don't remember the last time I saw an ad on the internet. (tv ads don't bother me since I never watch tv)

 

[meandu229]

Ads are good, they draw you too things,


E.g back in 2004 I saw an add for the gp32 console,, bought one, and now have a pandora all because of 1 little ad.


They are not all bad,


Although I hate how apple shows the iphone advert and then puts at the bottom something like


sequence shortened steps removed. after they show yo how quick and easy it is.

 

[Austin25]

Ads are good, they draw you too things,


E.g back in 2004 I saw an add for the gp32 console,, bought one, and now have a pandora all because of 1 little ad.


They are not all bad,


Although I hate how apple shows the iphone advert and then puts at the bottom something like


sequence shortened steps removed. after they show yo how quick and easy it is.

Yeah, all the legalese in tiny print at the bottom.Many ads do that, but none for which I respect.

 

[- Theo -]

The way it works today is, in my opinion, preferable. Most people just put up with ads, generating the revenue, but if you know how, there's a pretty easy way around it (adblock, noscript) that may be slightly annoying getting used to, for example, with noscript, you have to unblock every flash game/video you want to watch or the full site it's hosted on, but in the end works out.


I don't remember the last time I saw an ad on the internet. (tv ads don't bother me since I never watch tv)

OK, but what about the political implication of advertisement?


Say I'm a weapon manufacturer that sell weapons to third-world countries, and I buy a lot of advertisement space on a newspaper, or TV channel, or whatever. Now that media wants to broadcast a show about war, peace, terror and how it would be good to stop selling weapons to some countries. Of course I'd be unhappy. So I'd phone this media president, threatening to pull off my ads money if they go with that. How do you think they'd react? They withdraw the show. It does happen, I have some real life examples.


Basically, if I pay for ads, I own the media. That's why I never trust newspaper or websites that rely on ads to live.

 

[Blue Protoman]

I'm hating big companies more and more with each passing day.

 

[Aethix]

The way it works today is, in my opinion, preferable. Most people just put up with ads, generating the revenue, but if you know how, there's a pretty easy way around it (adblock, noscript) that may be slightly annoying getting used to, for example, with noscript, you have to unblock every flash game/video you want to watch or the full site it's hosted on, but in the end works out.


I don't remember the last time I saw an ad on the internet. (tv ads don't bother me since I never watch tv)

OK, but what about the political implication of advertisement?


Say I'm a weapon manufacturer that sell weapons to third-world countries, and I buy a lot of advertisement space on a newspaper, or TV channel, or whatever. Now that media wants to broadcast a show about war, peace, terror and how it would be good to stop selling weapons to some countries. Of course I'd be unhappy. So I'd phone this media president, threatening to pull off my ads money if they go with that. How do you think they'd react? They withdraw the show. It does happen, I have some real life examples.


Basically, if I pay for ads, I own the media. That's why I never trust newspaper or websites that rely on ads to live.

That assumes you're the only person paying for ads in that show. Which, if you are, the show wouldn't be running in the first place.

 

[lulzfish]

That assumes you're the only person paying for ads in that show.

Largest aggregate of advertisers wins.


So there must be very few politically moderate publications?