Preface: I wanted to write out some thoughts and elaborate on my feelings. Yesterday I was met with 5 promoted advertisements out of 10 posts in my social media feed and it really got me thinking...
Exemplary
Preface: I wanted to write out some thoughts and elaborate on my feelings. Yesterday I was met with 5 promoted advertisements out of 10 posts in my social media feed and it really got me thinking about how out of hand advertisements and the premium models have become. Apologies in advance if this comes off as more of a rant.
Facebook, X, Reddit, Insta, Pinterest, etc. have all become increasingly flooded with paid advertisements and promoted content. Paired with the rise of artificially generated content, we have come to a point where the user experience and community on the internet is degrading at a rapid rate.
Many have talked about how X or Reddit is mostly bots talking to bots or how regrettable it is to pay with a Premium plan for a product which was once free simply to get rid of the advertisement overload of the current product. I find increased frustration with these two and feel saddened for those who are not in such a priviledged financial position as myself to pay for Premium plans. Why are feeds flooded with advertisements deemed acceptable in society today? Why aren't we as a community acting en masse to protest artificially generated content which is clogging up conversations and pushing agendas which are disingenuous to the greater community?
This model has created a regressive, two-tiered system where wealthier users pay for ad-free privacy, while lower-income users are forced to consume a degraded, ad-heavy product. It reminds me of the concept of "shadow work" where people are paying and wasting their time on things which provide no real substance to their own lives, but benefit the bottom line of these tech companies. I understand how we as consumers expect free digital services since it was the norm in the earlier days of the internet, but the overwhelming dominance of major platforms makes it difficult for us to migrate to alternatives without abandoning established social networks. I have been struggling to get myself off of the big platforms because the creators I have come to enjoy can only make their business model work through remaining on those platforms and having the largest target audience see thier product. In many cases, I have asked why those people do not make their own site and the answer defaults to "I will end up losing a lot of my customer base by switching off of X and onto my own platform. There are just more people looking at my content here." Because platforms function as both a monopoly on the service and a monopsony on the audience, creators cannot afford the churn rate of moving to an independent site. They are functionally captive to the algorithm's demands and big tech's "Town Square" model.
Platforms run at a loss initially to capture users and creators, exploiting network effects where a platform's value increases solely because everyone else is already there. Once users and creators are locked in due to the exceptionally high social and financial costs of switching, platforms shift their focus from the user experience to extracting value for shareholders, resulting in a dramatic increase in ad load and artificial content. We have seen this time and time again and I find myself increasingly frustrated by the event. Research on the consequences of advertising shows when privacy regulations or premium models are introduced, platforms compensate by shifting heavier ad burdens onto lower-income consumers, effectively taxing their time while wealthier users buy their way out (see link provided for a more in-depth analysis on this which I found of interest).
The lack of protest seems to stem from a collective action problem. Platforms did not flood feeds with ads and bots overnight. The degradation was gradual. Society accepts this because the alternative requires coordinating a mass exodus. Artificially generated content acts as a filler that keeps engagement metrics artificially high for advertisers, masking the actual decline in human interaction. This creates an illusion of a thriving community while the digital town square is hollowed out. The monetization of digital spaces has effectively privatized what was once viewed as a public utility, leaving users to bear the psychological and literal costs of navigating todays internet.
I have been working to make it so I don't think so cynically and believe the AI bubble is going to eventually pop and the advertising model overall will change to something more sustainable long term. It feels like I need to pay for almost all of my products online these days in order not to waste my time on advertisements or content which provide no real benefit to me. Seeing the botnets flood discussion threads has really put a damper on my interests in hobbies and hearing what other people have to say. I don't know what the right answer is or how we as a society can work to fix this issue. Curious to hear what the rest of the Tildes community thinks about this and if anyone else has similar thoughts with the ongoings of our modern AI driven age.
Especially over the last few years, we've seen this happen at an alarming rate and it makes me think that even the most casual user is probably feeling the same aversion to using these platforms...
Especially over the last few years, we've seen this happen at an alarming rate and it makes me think that even the most casual user is probably feeling the same aversion to using these platforms as I am.
Without an ad blocker, they're basically unusable. It's an affront to the senses and in my mind, probably pushing people off of the big platforms entirely.
Conversely, I still know plenty of people that use them and in fact, have increased their usage in the last several years. I have two friends that started using Reddit in 2023 and still regularly...
Conversely, I still know plenty of people that use them and in fact, have increased their usage in the last several years. I have two friends that started using Reddit in 2023 and still regularly send me Instagram stuff that a myself and other friends can't view because we don't have accounts for that.
My family also still uses the stuff and I never hear a complaint about ads. I think most people are just inured to advertising. They just sit through the stuff and hardly pay attention to it.
The moment I sat down with my dad to watch YouTube through his smart tv was the moment I came to the same conclusion. For the cable TV audience, ads never left. For digital natives who are willing...
The moment I sat down with my dad to watch YouTube through his smart tv was the moment I came to the same conclusion.
For the cable TV audience, ads never left. For digital natives who are willing to put up with them today, the 2010s probably feel like a dream.
Yup, exactly. To my parents it's just the way it's always been, same with many friends in my life. My brother in laws girlfriend likes ads, so she knows what to buy, but she has a shopping...
Yup, exactly. To my parents it's just the way it's always been, same with many friends in my life. My brother in laws girlfriend likes ads, so she knows what to buy, but she has a shopping problem.
A friend of mine will sit through YouTube ads and when I tell him he can fix that, he blows me off.
Between uBlock and my Pihole, we very rarely see any ads in my house, which has made my wife and I (kids less so, but they're young yet) extra sensitive to seeing them. I think for folks like us, we've become so used to blocking them, we forget that before that time, we would also just kind of tune them out and move on with our lives.
See, ads make me do the opposite, it triggers the inherent "this person is trying to sell me something I don't need" feelings and makes me avoid the product. I have a friend I've known for a long...
My brother in laws girlfriend likes ads, so she knows what to buy
See, ads make me do the opposite, it triggers the inherent "this person is trying to sell me something I don't need" feelings and makes me avoid the product.
I have a friend I've known for a long time who has worked at Meta for over a decade. He's now working in their ads division I believe, and he was telling me about how some of the insights they look into is "what ads people want to see". To me that's an entirely foreign concept. The amount of ads I want to see is zero. How people actually want to see ads is beyond me. My other friend was completely baffled that I completely ignore all of the "in feed" ads and had no idea how I find what products to buy.
People's widespread acceptance of ads will always baffle me.
Full disclosure, I work in e-commerce advertising, though I do not work for or with any of the platforms mentioned in the thread. I have, but refuse to anymore, for reasons I'll probably get into...
Full disclosure, I work in e-commerce advertising, though I do not work for or with any of the platforms mentioned in the thread. I have, but refuse to anymore, for reasons I'll probably get into in some other comments as they're not germane here.
The statistical reality, for better or worse, is that two things are as true as they are counterintuitive to people like us, because I also prefer my ad load to be zero and go to great lengths to keep it that way. (I assure you the irony is not lost on me.)
First, most people actually do view advertising as a net benefit to expose them to new products and services. You'd think it'd be a minority but it isn't according to multiple studies. Importantly, this is true only as long as the advertisements are both relevant and not stupid like what we call "chum bucket" ads ("Click here for the #1 weight loss secret doctors don't want you to know") so it depends on good creative and good targeting algorithms, which aren't guaranteed.
Second, something people often complain about regardless of platform is seeing the same ads over and over again, even for things they just bought! Unfortunately every study on the subject (again, barring irrelevance or stupidity) shows that repetition will result in higher conversion over time. It doesn't make intuitive sense, but it works. You can argue it's manipulative, or if the algorithm is actually doing its job, you can argue that it's just keeping the balloon in the air until the customer is in the right frame of mind to buy.
Is this a great state of affairs? Who knows. But it's why in meat space billboards and seeing the same commercial on TV every ad break has existed for nearly a century. It seems wild even to me that this is what people seem to want, but if it didn't work, no one would do it.
Note this has nothing to do with the OP's premise about class separation on platforms or Dead Internet Theory, I'm only responding to the idea of why people actually like ads.
Fewer trips to the kitchen during a half hour tv show (ahem, I mean 22 minutes) has done wonders for my waistline. I guess some people just aren't as passionate about the notion that ads aren't...
Fewer trips to the kitchen during a half hour tv show (ahem, I mean 22 minutes) has done wonders for my waistline.
I guess some people just aren't as passionate about the notion that ads aren't just a way of life. Well, it's their time they're wasting.
Not to give my old man too hard a time, but when the YouTube video he's waiting to watch is just some bumpkin with a metal detector walking around old castles looking for coins, I can see why ads might even feel like entertainment ;D
If you really want to view the instagram posts, you can funnel them through vxinstagram. No account needed (generally; while I do have an account, I do not log in on my phone and so far everything...
Instagram stuff that a myself and other friends can't view because we don't have accounts for that
If you really want to view the instagram posts, you can funnel them through vxinstagram. No account needed (generally; while I do have an account, I do not log in on my phone and so far everything linked to me has been viewable, even some possible nsfw type stuff).
I've just unplugged from social media. Around the start of the year I was frustrated that half the posts had become obvious ChatGPT slop so I just deleted my accounts on pretty much all the sites....
I've just unplugged from social media. Around the start of the year I was frustrated that half the posts had become obvious ChatGPT slop so I just deleted my accounts on pretty much all the sites. I've switched to mostly only using messaging apps with my direct friends. For art and creators I go to a lot of in person events and buying direct from the artists. I don't really need content creator content so that was no loss to me.
I'm fortunate in a large city I have tons of local events and spaces to socialise and see artists in person rather than in a twitter feed mixed in with ads, politics and racism.
Valid approach. I see myself deletong majority of mine and sticking with artists and such behind the paywall so I can support them and not have ads. Unfortunately I don't have the opportunity to...
Valid approach. I see myself deletong majority of mine and sticking with artists and such behind the paywall so I can support them and not have ads. Unfortunately I don't have the opportunity to travel as much as I would like for local events, but the time savings not seeing ads or having to sift through slop would be great.
I have a different take on this. TLDR: let’s keep this in perspective, these websites are neat and fun but not a basic right, and I think that the quality of these things rise and fall over time....
I have a different take on this.
TLDR: let’s keep this in perspective, these websites are neat and fun but not a basic right, and I think that the quality of these things rise and fall over time.
When I was a little kid, we only had broadcast TV. There were about 5 channels and you had to turn the thing on at a specific time of day if you wanted to watch a specific show. During a 30 minute show, there would be about 8 minutes of advertisements. I watched many hours of television and the same commercials repeated over and over. Decades later, I can quote many of those commercials.
Then videotape came out and HBO and Netflix and there was a window of time when you could watch a lot of things with almost zero advertising. It was pretty great.
Nobody owed me the shows I watched. If I hated the commercials, I would choose not to watch the shows and read a book instead.
I used to talk to friends on the telephone for hours. Because that’s all we had. There wasn’t any reddit or facebook or discord. So we talked on the phone. In a house with a wire, and my dad would yell at me sometimes because my sister wasn’t able to use it while I was.
More recently, I used to watch quite a bit of YouTube. Then they added too many commercials so I stopped using it. But then I found the freetube app and SponsorBlock so I watch YouTube again. Sometimes freetube stops working for a few days so I do something else with my time.
Nobody owes you social media. Every once in a while, a new form of entertainment or communication appears and it’s good for a while. Then it gets bad and something takes its place.
Rich people being able to pay for premium ad-free websites is no more unfair than rich people getting good seats at a sports event.
I like this take and honestly I think unfortunately ads-based entertainment is vastly preferred over other choices. It's an inconvenient truth. I do think its quite possible to create alternative...
I like this take and honestly I think unfortunately ads-based entertainment is vastly preferred over other choices. It's an inconvenient truth. I do think its quite possible to create alternative platforms like Tildes where the business model is completely different but that requires a lot of effort and people to keep an open mind to try them.
TL DR: these platforms have power because people love them so much that they don't mind ads. If one doesn't like it then gotta try to help people try alternatives and understand trade offs.
With enough persistence, it's possible to live an ad-free life. Ublock, pi-hole (any dns blocker), and YouTube Revanced all go a long way. Combined with pirating content, I'm not sure I ever see...
With enough persistence, it's possible to live an ad-free life. Ublock, pi-hole (any dns blocker), and YouTube Revanced all go a long way. Combined with pirating content, I'm not sure I ever see ads? Platforms like Twitch make it really difficult to block ads, so I don't use it. In a similar vein, I refuse to pay for subscription that still shows me ads (cable television).
There are some downsides. For example, I rarely know about popular movie releases until someone tells me about them.
I am right there with you (except ya'har due to strict internal regulations where I live). I have Ublock and pi-hole which does a great job at home. It is out in town I get frustrated with things....
I am right there with you (except ya'har due to strict internal regulations where I live). I have Ublock and pi-hole which does a great job at home. It is out in town I get frustrated with things. Thanks for sharing!
FYI Android and iPhone both have DNS ad-block methods. Android: https://www.makeuseof.com/block-ads-on-android-phone-with-adguard-dns/ iPhone: https://apple.nextdns.io/ Mobile Firefox is another...
FYI Android and iPhone both have DNS ad-block methods.
Mobile Firefox is another option, since it allows installing ublock and privacy badger.
The only problem is it can be pretty confusing when things don't work randomly. You never know if it's the DNS block, an extension, the website is broken, or any of combination of those. If you play mobile games, it can also stop those from working. Usually it's when they force you to watch an ad to progress, but the ad never loads.
I've found that for single player games, denying them network access is often enough to let them work but not see ads. (Maybe this capability is a GrapheneOS thing?)
If you play mobile games, it can also stop those from working.
I've found that for single player games, denying them network access is often enough to let them work but not see ads.
I don't think stock android has that (I have a Samsung S22). How is GrapheneOS? I used to flash custom ROMs all the time as a kid, but never have as an adult. The biggest thing with Samsung is...
I don't think stock android has that (I have a Samsung S22). How is GrapheneOS? I used to flash custom ROMs all the time as a kid, but never have as an adult. The biggest thing with Samsung is they use those physical fuses that blow when you unlock the bootloader. I suppose I don't have a reason to be concerned if I don't want to sell this phone down the road.
I run GrapheneOS and I must say it is a boring experience in the best of ways. Functions the way you wish Android should. Was easy to setup and if you use Google Play Services, you really don't...
I run GrapheneOS and I must say it is a boring experience in the best of ways. Functions the way you wish Android should. Was easy to setup and if you use Google Play Services, you really don't lose much functionality. I still use Google Maps just fine. Only features I noticably gave up was tap to pay and Banking apps (but web apps work just fine).
Oh interesting. Do you know the reasoning for tap to pay not working? Presumably the same reason RCS requires Google Messenger (that is, there is no good reason).
Oh interesting. Do you know the reasoning for tap to pay not working? Presumably the same reason RCS requires Google Messenger (that is, there is no good reason).
TL:DR: Google doesn't like us making a more secure or private solution so they would rather remove features for "security purposes" Google requires devices to pass a strict set of security...
TL:DR: Google doesn't like us making a more secure or private solution so they would rather remove features for "security purposes"
Google requires devices to pass a strict set of security certifications called CTS (Compatibility Test Suite) and Play Integrity/SafetyNet attestation. Google Wallet will flag GrapheneOS as not meeting security standards (ironic) and disable contactless payments. So Google Wallet is a bust, but things like Curve Pay, Banks which have their own system, or Smartwatch tap to pay still works.
This is an assumption without any supporting data. Low income customers may very well be just or more advertising-averse but lack the means to act on that adversity. This sort of class bias really...
Low-income consumers—who consume the ad-supported version because they are
more price sensitive and less advertising-averse
This is an assumption without any supporting data. Low income customers may very well be just or more advertising-averse but lack the means to act on that adversity. This sort of class bias really annoys me.
It's not class bias. Advertising-averse means "given my options, I choose the ad-supported solution over paying or not consuming at all". You're just defining exactly what "advertising-averse"...
It's not class bias. Advertising-averse means "given my options, I choose the ad-supported solution over paying or not consuming at all". You're just defining exactly what "advertising-averse" means.
Edit: alternatively, we need a different term to describe a willingness to trade advertising viewing for money. Someone can be more or less $TERM than another person (and it might be financially related, but outside of the scope of $TERM to describe).
In their model, aversion towards advertising and price sensitivity are two different parameters. The assumption does seem to be somewhat supported by data, though. They cite Garrett A Johnson,...
In their model, aversion towards advertising and price sensitivity are two different parameters.
It's setting up a comparison where "Given my options" means $10 dollars I won't notice for one group vs. 2 gallons of milk for my children for the other, and calling the choice they make proof of...
It's setting up a comparison where "Given my options" means $10 dollars I won't notice for one group vs. 2 gallons of milk for my children for the other, and calling the choice they make proof of how they feel about advertising.
Hence, the latter is price sensitive ("This money is better spent on milk for my children") and less averse to advertising ("seeing ads is better than not having milk for my children"). The term...
Hence, the latter is price sensitive ("This money is better spent on milk for my children") and less averse to advertising ("seeing ads is better than not having milk for my children"). The term itself is useful and doesn't come with a moralistic slant to it. If you want to avoid useful terms because some terms are more likely to apply to some socioeconomic classes than others, then we will quickly lose the ability to use descriptions. Propose an alternative that isn't susceptible to this, I guess.
The problem is they are set as an equivalence, as if they are equal choices, when in fact we are looking at a choice based on significantly different percentages of disposable income and in a case...
The problem is they are set as an equivalence, as if they are equal choices, when in fact we are looking at a choice based on significantly different percentages of disposable income and in a case where one may not have disposable income at all.
Stating that low income people are less advertisement avoidant than high income people because they are less likely to pay for ads is missing that low income people are not making the same choice. The comparison is not accurate or useful, Class bias is not about morality, it's about applying an inaccurate set of presumptions to a group, resulting in inaccurate findings--sloppy research. The alternative in this case would be avoid presenting these as equal choices, or do a little more work to determine the actual attitudes of low income people toward advertising rather that making unsupported assumptions.
Preface: I wanted to write out some thoughts and elaborate on my feelings. Yesterday I was met with 5 promoted advertisements out of 10 posts in my social media feed and it really got me thinking about how out of hand advertisements and the premium models have become. Apologies in advance if this comes off as more of a rant.
Facebook, X, Reddit, Insta, Pinterest, etc. have all become increasingly flooded with paid advertisements and promoted content. Paired with the rise of artificially generated content, we have come to a point where the user experience and community on the internet is degrading at a rapid rate.
Many have talked about how X or Reddit is mostly bots talking to bots or how regrettable it is to pay with a Premium plan for a product which was once free simply to get rid of the advertisement overload of the current product. I find increased frustration with these two and feel saddened for those who are not in such a priviledged financial position as myself to pay for Premium plans. Why are feeds flooded with advertisements deemed acceptable in society today? Why aren't we as a community acting en masse to protest artificially generated content which is clogging up conversations and pushing agendas which are disingenuous to the greater community?
This model has created a regressive, two-tiered system where wealthier users pay for ad-free privacy, while lower-income users are forced to consume a degraded, ad-heavy product. It reminds me of the concept of "shadow work" where people are paying and wasting their time on things which provide no real substance to their own lives, but benefit the bottom line of these tech companies. I understand how we as consumers expect free digital services since it was the norm in the earlier days of the internet, but the overwhelming dominance of major platforms makes it difficult for us to migrate to alternatives without abandoning established social networks. I have been struggling to get myself off of the big platforms because the creators I have come to enjoy can only make their business model work through remaining on those platforms and having the largest target audience see thier product. In many cases, I have asked why those people do not make their own site and the answer defaults to "I will end up losing a lot of my customer base by switching off of X and onto my own platform. There are just more people looking at my content here." Because platforms function as both a monopoly on the service and a monopsony on the audience, creators cannot afford the churn rate of moving to an independent site. They are functionally captive to the algorithm's demands and big tech's "Town Square" model.
Platforms run at a loss initially to capture users and creators, exploiting network effects where a platform's value increases solely because everyone else is already there. Once users and creators are locked in due to the exceptionally high social and financial costs of switching, platforms shift their focus from the user experience to extracting value for shareholders, resulting in a dramatic increase in ad load and artificial content. We have seen this time and time again and I find myself increasingly frustrated by the event. Research on the consequences of advertising shows when privacy regulations or premium models are introduced, platforms compensate by shifting heavier ad burdens onto lower-income consumers, effectively taxing their time while wealthier users buy their way out (see link provided for a more in-depth analysis on this which I found of interest).
The lack of protest seems to stem from a collective action problem. Platforms did not flood feeds with ads and bots overnight. The degradation was gradual. Society accepts this because the alternative requires coordinating a mass exodus. Artificially generated content acts as a filler that keeps engagement metrics artificially high for advertisers, masking the actual decline in human interaction. This creates an illusion of a thriving community while the digital town square is hollowed out. The monetization of digital spaces has effectively privatized what was once viewed as a public utility, leaving users to bear the psychological and literal costs of navigating todays internet.
I have been working to make it so I don't think so cynically and believe the AI bubble is going to eventually pop and the advertising model overall will change to something more sustainable long term. It feels like I need to pay for almost all of my products online these days in order not to waste my time on advertisements or content which provide no real benefit to me. Seeing the botnets flood discussion threads has really put a damper on my interests in hobbies and hearing what other people have to say. I don't know what the right answer is or how we as a society can work to fix this issue. Curious to hear what the rest of the Tildes community thinks about this and if anyone else has similar thoughts with the ongoings of our modern AI driven age.
Especially over the last few years, we've seen this happen at an alarming rate and it makes me think that even the most casual user is probably feeling the same aversion to using these platforms as I am.
Without an ad blocker, they're basically unusable. It's an affront to the senses and in my mind, probably pushing people off of the big platforms entirely.
Conversely, I still know plenty of people that use them and in fact, have increased their usage in the last several years. I have two friends that started using Reddit in 2023 and still regularly send me Instagram stuff that a myself and other friends can't view because we don't have accounts for that.
My family also still uses the stuff and I never hear a complaint about ads. I think most people are just inured to advertising. They just sit through the stuff and hardly pay attention to it.
The moment I sat down with my dad to watch YouTube through his smart tv was the moment I came to the same conclusion.
For the cable TV audience, ads never left. For digital natives who are willing to put up with them today, the 2010s probably feel like a dream.
Yup, exactly. To my parents it's just the way it's always been, same with many friends in my life. My brother in laws girlfriend likes ads, so she knows what to buy, but she has a shopping problem.
A friend of mine will sit through YouTube ads and when I tell him he can fix that, he blows me off.
Between uBlock and my Pihole, we very rarely see any ads in my house, which has made my wife and I (kids less so, but they're young yet) extra sensitive to seeing them. I think for folks like us, we've become so used to blocking them, we forget that before that time, we would also just kind of tune them out and move on with our lives.
See, ads make me do the opposite, it triggers the inherent "this person is trying to sell me something I don't need" feelings and makes me avoid the product.
I have a friend I've known for a long time who has worked at Meta for over a decade. He's now working in their ads division I believe, and he was telling me about how some of the insights they look into is "what ads people want to see". To me that's an entirely foreign concept. The amount of ads I want to see is zero. How people actually want to see ads is beyond me. My other friend was completely baffled that I completely ignore all of the "in feed" ads and had no idea how I find what products to buy.
People's widespread acceptance of ads will always baffle me.
Full disclosure, I work in e-commerce advertising, though I do not work for or with any of the platforms mentioned in the thread. I have, but refuse to anymore, for reasons I'll probably get into in some other comments as they're not germane here.
The statistical reality, for better or worse, is that two things are as true as they are counterintuitive to people like us, because I also prefer my ad load to be zero and go to great lengths to keep it that way. (I assure you the irony is not lost on me.)
First, most people actually do view advertising as a net benefit to expose them to new products and services. You'd think it'd be a minority but it isn't according to multiple studies. Importantly, this is true only as long as the advertisements are both relevant and not stupid like what we call "chum bucket" ads ("Click here for the #1 weight loss secret doctors don't want you to know") so it depends on good creative and good targeting algorithms, which aren't guaranteed.
Second, something people often complain about regardless of platform is seeing the same ads over and over again, even for things they just bought! Unfortunately every study on the subject (again, barring irrelevance or stupidity) shows that repetition will result in higher conversion over time. It doesn't make intuitive sense, but it works. You can argue it's manipulative, or if the algorithm is actually doing its job, you can argue that it's just keeping the balloon in the air until the customer is in the right frame of mind to buy.
Is this a great state of affairs? Who knows. But it's why in meat space billboards and seeing the same commercial on TV every ad break has existed for nearly a century. It seems wild even to me that this is what people seem to want, but if it didn't work, no one would do it.
Note this has nothing to do with the OP's premise about class separation on platforms or Dead Internet Theory, I'm only responding to the idea of why people actually like ads.
Fewer trips to the kitchen during a half hour tv show (ahem, I mean 22 minutes) has done wonders for my waistline.
I guess some people just aren't as passionate about the notion that ads aren't just a way of life. Well, it's their time they're wasting.
Not to give my old man too hard a time, but when the YouTube video he's waiting to watch is just some bumpkin with a metal detector walking around old castles looking for coins, I can see why ads might even feel like entertainment ;D
If you really want to view the instagram posts, you can funnel them through vxinstagram. No account needed (generally; while I do have an account, I do not log in on my phone and so far everything linked to me has been viewable, even some possible nsfw type stuff).
You might enjoy the book "The Age of Extraction" by Tim Wu - check your local library
Thank you for this. Added to the reading list and looks quite interesting based on the back cover.
I've just unplugged from social media. Around the start of the year I was frustrated that half the posts had become obvious ChatGPT slop so I just deleted my accounts on pretty much all the sites. I've switched to mostly only using messaging apps with my direct friends. For art and creators I go to a lot of in person events and buying direct from the artists. I don't really need content creator content so that was no loss to me.
I'm fortunate in a large city I have tons of local events and spaces to socialise and see artists in person rather than in a twitter feed mixed in with ads, politics and racism.
Valid approach. I see myself deletong majority of mine and sticking with artists and such behind the paywall so I can support them and not have ads. Unfortunately I don't have the opportunity to travel as much as I would like for local events, but the time savings not seeing ads or having to sift through slop would be great.
I have a different take on this.
TLDR: let’s keep this in perspective, these websites are neat and fun but not a basic right, and I think that the quality of these things rise and fall over time.
When I was a little kid, we only had broadcast TV. There were about 5 channels and you had to turn the thing on at a specific time of day if you wanted to watch a specific show. During a 30 minute show, there would be about 8 minutes of advertisements. I watched many hours of television and the same commercials repeated over and over. Decades later, I can quote many of those commercials.
Then videotape came out and HBO and Netflix and there was a window of time when you could watch a lot of things with almost zero advertising. It was pretty great.
Nobody owed me the shows I watched. If I hated the commercials, I would choose not to watch the shows and read a book instead.
I used to talk to friends on the telephone for hours. Because that’s all we had. There wasn’t any reddit or facebook or discord. So we talked on the phone. In a house with a wire, and my dad would yell at me sometimes because my sister wasn’t able to use it while I was.
More recently, I used to watch quite a bit of YouTube. Then they added too many commercials so I stopped using it. But then I found the freetube app and SponsorBlock so I watch YouTube again. Sometimes freetube stops working for a few days so I do something else with my time.
Nobody owes you social media. Every once in a while, a new form of entertainment or communication appears and it’s good for a while. Then it gets bad and something takes its place.
Rich people being able to pay for premium ad-free websites is no more unfair than rich people getting good seats at a sports event.
I like this take and honestly I think unfortunately ads-based entertainment is vastly preferred over other choices. It's an inconvenient truth. I do think its quite possible to create alternative platforms like Tildes where the business model is completely different but that requires a lot of effort and people to keep an open mind to try them.
TL DR: these platforms have power because people love them so much that they don't mind ads. If one doesn't like it then gotta try to help people try alternatives and understand trade offs.
With enough persistence, it's possible to live an ad-free life. Ublock, pi-hole (any dns blocker), and YouTube Revanced all go a long way. Combined with pirating content, I'm not sure I ever see ads? Platforms like Twitch make it really difficult to block ads, so I don't use it. In a similar vein, I refuse to pay for subscription that still shows me ads (cable television).
There are some downsides. For example, I rarely know about popular movie releases until someone tells me about them.
Wish they made ad blockers for highway billboards and those guys that approach you from the midway kiosks at the mall.
I am right there with you (except ya'har due to strict internal regulations where I live). I have Ublock and pi-hole which does a great job at home. It is out in town I get frustrated with things. Thanks for sharing!
FYI Android and iPhone both have DNS ad-block methods.
Android: https://www.makeuseof.com/block-ads-on-android-phone-with-adguard-dns/
iPhone: https://apple.nextdns.io/
Mobile Firefox is another option, since it allows installing ublock and privacy badger.
The only problem is it can be pretty confusing when things don't work randomly. You never know if it's the DNS block, an extension, the website is broken, or any of combination of those. If you play mobile games, it can also stop those from working. Usually it's when they force you to watch an ad to progress, but the ad never loads.
I've found that for single player games, denying them network access is often enough to let them work but not see ads.
(Maybe this capability is a GrapheneOS thing?)
I don't think stock android has that (I have a Samsung S22). How is GrapheneOS? I used to flash custom ROMs all the time as a kid, but never have as an adult. The biggest thing with Samsung is they use those physical fuses that blow when you unlock the bootloader. I suppose I don't have a reason to be concerned if I don't want to sell this phone down the road.
I run GrapheneOS and I must say it is a boring experience in the best of ways. Functions the way you wish Android should. Was easy to setup and if you use Google Play Services, you really don't lose much functionality. I still use Google Maps just fine. Only features I noticably gave up was tap to pay and Banking apps (but web apps work just fine).
Oh interesting. Do you know the reasoning for tap to pay not working? Presumably the same reason RCS requires Google Messenger (that is, there is no good reason).
TL:DR: Google doesn't like us making a more secure or private solution so they would rather remove features for "security purposes"
Google requires devices to pass a strict set of security certifications called CTS (Compatibility Test Suite) and Play Integrity/SafetyNet attestation. Google Wallet will flag GrapheneOS as not meeting security standards (ironic) and disable contactless payments. So Google Wallet is a bust, but things like Curve Pay, Banks which have their own system, or Smartwatch tap to pay still works.
I like it, and it seems overall other tildonians do too...
Afaik it only works on Pixels though.
Thanks for the tips. I will have to give adguard a shot. Cheers!
This is an assumption without any supporting data. Low income customers may very well be just or more advertising-averse but lack the means to act on that adversity. This sort of class bias really annoys me.
It's not class bias. Advertising-averse means "given my options, I choose the ad-supported solution over paying or not consuming at all". You're just defining exactly what "advertising-averse" means.
Edit: alternatively, we need a different term to describe a willingness to trade advertising viewing for money. Someone can be more or less $TERM than another person (and it might be financially related, but outside of the scope of $TERM to describe).
In their model, aversion towards advertising and price sensitivity are two different parameters.
The assumption does seem to be somewhat supported by data, though. They cite Garrett A Johnson, Scott K Shriver, and Shaoyin Du. Consumer privacy choice in online advertising: Who opts out and at what cost to industry? Marketing Science, 39(1):33–51, 2020 which is an empirical study finding that (free) opt-out (through AdChoices) rates of ad tracking drop as income drops, though with higher opt-out rates in both extremes. With that in mind it also makes sense to model it separately from price sensitivity. There is some other resource at play here. Maybe time and energy?
It's setting up a comparison where "Given my options" means $10 dollars I won't notice for one group vs. 2 gallons of milk for my children for the other, and calling the choice they make proof of how they feel about advertising.
Hence, the latter is price sensitive ("This money is better spent on milk for my children") and less averse to advertising ("seeing ads is better than not having milk for my children"). The term itself is useful and doesn't come with a moralistic slant to it. If you want to avoid useful terms because some terms are more likely to apply to some socioeconomic classes than others, then we will quickly lose the ability to use descriptions. Propose an alternative that isn't susceptible to this, I guess.
The problem is they are set as an equivalence, as if they are equal choices, when in fact we are looking at a choice based on significantly different percentages of disposable income and in a case where one may not have disposable income at all.
Stating that low income people are less advertisement avoidant than high income people because they are less likely to pay for ads is missing that low income people are not making the same choice. The comparison is not accurate or useful, Class bias is not about morality, it's about applying an inaccurate set of presumptions to a group, resulting in inaccurate findings--sloppy research. The alternative in this case would be avoid presenting these as equal choices, or do a little more work to determine the actual attitudes of low income people toward advertising rather that making unsupported assumptions.
I saw this stand-up about marketing linked earlier today, might fit here nicely.
I sure do agree with it.
George Carlin’s Advertising Lullaby is another of my favs.