Page 2 of 2

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:22 am
by Roja
Hockey wrote:You too...shame shame... :lol:
Not at all. Do not put shame onto me for choosing what I look at and don't.

Shame on you for accepting blindly that things work the way they do, and for willingly accepting relentless advertising!
Hockey wrote:Mr. free speech, open source, accesability advocate himself...blocks ads... :?
Most definitely. Free speech does NOT give you (or advertisers) the right to control what I hear and don't. It doesn't give advertisers the right to force me to sit through commercials, or control what I see on my monitor.

Its entirely my choice to walk away from idiots chanting in a crowd, but you think its different on the internet?
Hockey wrote:I know none of those have anything to do with advertising...as I can't say myself that I have *ever* bought anything from clicking on a ad banner (although I have visited some sites and considered buying)...
There are only two purposes for Advertising: Brand recognition, and sales.

Ads do not drive sales for me, or for most others (yourself apparently included). That means half of its purpose is a waste of time for the advertiser, and for me.

Brand recognition is the hope that if you know the name when you go to buy, you will be more likely to buy that product. (Testing has shown this to be overwhelmingly true). However, much like the annoying jingle on the radio, it can quickly backfire, resulting in brand hostility. Thats precisely what happens with ads that I cannot block. I become hostile to that brand.

Net result? Ads on the internet that I cannot block make the product *less* appealing to me - the exact opposite of what the advertiser wants. I'm simply improving their acceptance rate by blocking them. I'm making them more effective!
Hockey wrote:The Internet relies almost entirely on advertising...

Web sites like this one...I fail to see why it exists or rather how...who pays for the bandwidth? The Maintenance, etc???
Ah, therein lies the rub!

I run a network of sites - over a dozen in fact - all out of pocket. The entire (linux) kernel.org distribution system, along with rpmfind, is entirely powered by volunteer donations. Wikipedia is entirely donation driven. The list is long, and proud.

In fact, when the Internet began, *everything* was powered without advertising. Advertising has creeped in since then, but the Internet does not RELY on advertising. The pipes would still be here, the data would still flow. Companies that want to sell product (Ford, Bud, precious delicious Mountain Dew) would still have their websites online even without advertising.

Perhaps sites like Slate wouldn't be. Maybe Slashdot would go away without ad revenues. Those individual sites are not the Internet, nor are the even "the web as we know it". They are a selection of sites that have chosen ad revenue because it is an attractive source of funding, that is convenient today. Thats the same selective pressure that causes Spam to be a force of epic strength. Take away that financial advantage, and spammers would go away. Similarly, if Advertising online became completely ineffective, there WOULD be replacements. Whether micro-subscriptions (ala PHP mag), network-subscriptions (ala AOL), donations (ala Wikipedia), or something entirely new (Wayne's world style product placements - Mmm, Mountain dew hits the spot!), the web would find a way.
Hockey wrote:Nothing will ever be *free* so why pretend like it is???
We're not pretending. On the flip side, why pretend that the only choice IS advertising that doesn't do its job?

Plenty of sites (like this one) manage to be incredibly useful, helpful, and worthwhile, all without running a single ad. Whether its a single wealthy donator, or a million faithful wiki-donators, the net ran just fine without advertisers spewing their spam across my screen for years.

There is no reason why it cannot do so again.

Of course, it would change the face of the web today quite a bit - but if you think "Punch the monkey" can't be improved upon, shame on you. :)

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:25 am
by Roja
Grim... wrote:My ad blocker (adblock plus) has suddenly stopped working on FF1.5.04 - which one do you guys use?
Flashblocker + adblock still working great for me in 1.5.04

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:51 am
by Oren
I voted for text ads. I don't like both, but there is no way I'm going to click on an image ad.

P.S Damn Hockey... Your posts are always so long :P

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:43 pm
by feyd
Grim... wrote:My ad blocker (adblock plus) has suddenly stopped working on FF1.5.04 - which one do you guys use?
although slightly off topic.. I use the original version of adBlock with filterset.G

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:57 pm
by alex.barylski
Seriously, I like text ads. They are a lot less visually invasive, they blend well with surroundings
Thats the catch 22 of advertising...some want very obvious advertisments and others want the sub-conscience attack...advertisers are tricky people to meet half way :)
As for blocking ads, well, the internet is the ultimate arena for freedom of choice. Some choose to block the ads, others not. Both of these users are totally within their rights as users of the internet and both of them are right for doing so.
Perhaps...tough call...heres the catch....nothing is ever *free* there is always a hook...

People who advocate a *free* Internet...I dunno...who is gonna pay for the bandwidth? Maintenance, hardware, etc???

In an ideal world...heck we'd all be given equal rights, power, freedoms, and access to resources, etc...

But this is reality...not the matrix...Open Source software developers might very well spend their free time hacking away at source code all the while absorbing development costs in both time spent and their own computer resources...and some might even find free hosting and others free graphics design...

But show me an example of a super high quality product which is totally free...none exist...SugarCRM is nice, but it's far from as good as some commercial prospects...

Life works this way...money makes people work hard...it's a reflection of how hard you work and it's the ultimate in life status...universal language...money talks...

The point is...a free Internet...thats garbage...it'll *never* happen in our life time anyways...you want quality products or services or information...you either pay directly or indirectly through advertising...

As someone who seems to always be on the low budget end of things...I would prefer the latter as advertising doesn't bother me...TV commercials are more evasive...like popup windows...actually require my time and attention...well positioned flash banners or text ads are no problem...they don't impede on anything I do nor waste my time waiting for the commercial to end or require direct action (closing a popup) and they keep advertisers happy and keep owners happy...

Anyways...I took this way off topic... :)

Back to disscussion :)

Cheers :)

Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 7:49 am
by Roja
Hockey wrote:Perhaps...tough call...heres the catch....nothing is ever *free* there is always a hook...
Free to the end-user, no, there isn't always.
Hockey wrote:People who advocate a *free* Internet...I dunno...who is gonna pay for the bandwidth? Maintenance, hardware, etc???
I've already covered that. Donors, sponsors (Devnetwork is provided thanks to its host), volunteers, and more.
Hockey wrote:Open Source software developers might very well spend their free time hacking away at source code all the while absorbing development costs in both time spent and their own computer resources...and some might even find free hosting and others free graphics design...
Wrong word. Its not they "might", its they HAVE, for over two decades!
Hockey wrote:But show me an example of a super high quality product which is totally free...none exist...SugarCRM is nice, but it's far from as good as some commercial prospects...
Linux (hundreds of distributions, powers Google), Wikipedia (recently critically evaluated to be superior to Encyclopedia Britanica!), PBS (provided by generous donors - and advertising free!), Devnet, PHP, Postgresql, BSD (which powers parts of Yahoo!).. The list goes on. Those are all absolutely super high quality products, in many cases superior to their non-free (as in beer) competitors.
Hockey wrote:Life works this way...money makes people work hard...it's a reflection of how hard you work and it's the ultimate in life status...universal language...money talks...
Its a shame that you measure life that way. Many people have other motivations that are far more rewarding.
Hockey wrote:The point is...a free Internet...thats garbage...it'll *never* happen in our life time anyways...
IT ALREADY DID!. The internet BEGAN free. It had zero ads when it started! In fact, the first ad that hit the 'net caused quite a ruckus. The current state is NOT the only option, and a free Internet HAS occurred in our lifetime. I know - I was on it!
Hockey wrote:you want quality products or services or information...you either pay directly or indirectly through advertising...
No, thats not the only two choices. You continue to refuse to look at real-world examples that have in the past proven that wrong, and continue to prove that wrong every day.

Every time you use the internet, in fact, you are using a product that was made for free - the BSD TCP/IP stack, used as the basis for almost every major OS's TCP stack for the last twenty years. (Yes, including Windows up until Win2k!). Every time you type in a domain name, you get sent to the correct location, again, thanks to a free software package - BIND. BIND powers the majority of the root servers AND name servers on the net today. Also a free package.

You are posting on a forum that is free software, possibly posting from a browser that is free software, discussing a free computer language (PHP), that runs on a free webserver (Apache) powering the majority of websites today, all while complaining that free doesn't make anything good.

Denial is NOT a river in Africa. Its doing all of those things, and then pondering how people could possibly imagine an online world that isn't paid for by advertising. We already live in it. Advertising driven content is the anomaly.

Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 11:07 am
by RobertGonzalez
Hockey wrote:
Everah wrote:As for blocking ads, well, the internet is the ultimate arena for freedom of choice. Some choose to block the ads, others not. Both of these users are totally within their rights as users of the internet and both of them are right for doing so.
Perhaps...tough call...heres the catch....nothing is ever *free* there is always a hook...
I agree that someone is paying for something somewhere. But people that use the *free* services needn't know that. Besides, I wasn't talking about something that can be bought, I was talking about our freedom to choose what we want to see and what we don't. What we want to say, read, post, download, etc. Just because someone pays for something doesn't mean I have to be bludgeoned with it.
Hockey wrote:People who advocate a *free* Internet...I dunno...who is gonna pay for the bandwidth? Maintenance, hardware, etc???
In my case, I do. I pay for my Internet connection. Why should I be forced to live with ads served by a free server, using my free browser, on a free OS when I am paying for my bandwidth? Companies have all sorts of methods for generating cashflow. I am fairly certain that web ads are not their prime resource.
Hockey wrote:In an ideal world...heck we'd all be given equal rights, power, freedoms, and access to resources, etc...
Euphoria would be one heckuva place to live... but since we are in a real world where people have to both earn money and spend money, let's make the best of it :) .
Hockey wrote:But show me an example of a super high quality product which is totally free...none exist...
Linux, the Apache HTTP server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, PHP, Gimp, OpenOffice, the list goes...
Hockey wrote:Life works this way...money makes people work hard...it's a reflection of how hard you work and it's the ultimate in life status...universal language...money talks...
When you die, is that all people are going to remember you by? I can honestly say that as of this writing, not knowing you personally, you would be remembered by me as someone who has struck very intriguing conversation, has theorized some pretty remarkable ideas, has quite an open view in many areas (and in other areas, some narrower views) and that you are an active contributor in at least one community (DevNet). By the way, how much do you make...
Hockey wrote:The point is...a free Internet...thats garbage...it'll *never* happen in our life time anyways...you want quality products or services or information...you either pay directly or indirectly through advertising...
1992, network connection given by my university, open and complete access to the Internet as it was known then. No ads, no pop-ups, just dialogue and communication. It was by no means in the same usability class as it is today (with the development of some pretty kick-butt software apps), but it was free and it did the trick.

As an FYI, I am not trying to instigate a flame war or 'egg on' Hockey. And I know that my responses did nothing to help steer this thread back on track. But free can be free to you and me (you know, 'free speech, not free beer') even when someone else is paying for it (like liberty).