Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | drawkward's comments login

I merely read the article, which cleared it up in the first sentences. In my experience, reading only the headline tends to leave out the nuance we used to consider the content.

> I merely read the article

Yeah we don't usually do that here :-)


Creating words is linguisto-washing that no one agreed to, yet somehow i was able to understand your sentence. In both cases, the washing is a step to achieving intended outcomes.

If I have a right to not be profiled, then laws can be made to deal with entities that violate said right.

1. All advertising is spam.

2. Advertising is a virus or tumor that will consume all available space in an ecosystem until there is no non-ad content left; it ultimately kills its host.


HN has advertisement. It has the sponsored hiring posts from YC, Show HN posts to projects, and the monthly who is hiring / wants to be hired posts, which are all advertisements. Seems far from cancerous.


HN is also not profitable and is not driven to be so. I don't think it's the ads in and of themselves that's the cancer, but rather that in order to make money, you need just shit-tons of the things. And as the number of ads goes up the amount of attention they get drops which just demands more ads to offset the lower-valued ones.

That being said, I absolutely vibe with the notion of ads being cancer. I would classify personally HN's "ads" as you describe as less advertisements and more just posted notices of things relevant to the community. I don't suspect money changes hands for those to be put up which I would personally classify as the line between the two. And, more importantly, they are likely to be relevant to a fair chunk of the users here, and for those they aren't, they're ignored easily enough too.


HN is only able to bet be profitable because it is backed by a company that is. And if you combine "posted notices of things relevant to the community" with a commercial intent, that is basically the definition of ads.

Also, when you say relevant to the community, what exactly is the definition of that? A job posting on "who is hiring" is likely to be relevant to maybe 0.001% of HN readers. If Apple put a big banner on the site saying "HN users get $100 off a MBP," I bet a much higher percentage of users would click on that (I would). But nobody would ever deny that is an ad. So I don't think community relevance is a great way to determine it. That community relevance factor is exactly what advertisers pay so much to targeted ad companies for anyway.

I do find ads annoying myself and use ad blockers to get rid of them. But I take exception to the idea that they are this cancerous destroying force. Published media has been an advertising platform since well before the internet and I just don't see a feasible way that business model can be replaced just because the medium is now the internet. Yes, there is subscription revenue, but even newspapers back in the day had ads on every page.


Newspapers no longer need to perform the overhead of printing and distributing which was a massive cost to the news org. They can also now sell to the world vs just the local market they can deliver papers to. So not only have their costs been lowered their customer base has expanded quite a bit in theory. Why should we therefore expect to see ads on subscriptions?


> HN is only able to bet be profitable because it is backed by a company that is.

I mean, yes, but also no. We had pages upon pages of unprofitable websites once. There was a time, believe it or not, when all kinds of people setup all kinds of websites, with no expectation whatsoever of making money off of them. I for one hosted a niche phpBB board for years on end at my own expense, offset only by occasional donations from the community we built.

> And if you combine "posted notices of things relevant to the community" with a commercial intent, that is basically the definition of ads.

Well, again, yes and no. I think there's a nuance there. A job posting for example does have commercial intent, but at the same time, it's a mutually beneficial relationship (hopefully anyway) for both the entity and the employee. I would much rather see job ads in a place like this than, I dunno, weight loss drugs and erection pills.

> Also, when you say relevant to the community, what exactly is the definition of that? A job posting on "who is hiring" is likely to be relevant to maybe 0.001% of HN readers.

I think it's much higher than that. Just because you're not unemployed doesn't mean you wouldn't be interested in a job posting. People move companies all the time.

> If Apple put a big banner on the site saying "HN users get $100 off a MBP," I bet a much higher percentage of users would click on that (I would). But nobody would ever deny that is an ad.

But, if the community overall benefits from that, even if that benefit is nothing more significant than a cheaper mac, I'd say that's an overall win for all involved.

> So I don't think community relevance is a great way to determine it. That community relevance factor is exactly what advertisers pay so much to targeted ad companies for anyway.

I'm not saying an ad is good because it's relevant. I'm saying an ad is less irritating if it's relevant. That's why I find most ads so grating, because they are for products I have zero interest in and they are occupying space and attention that would be better filled with something I'm at least vaguely interested in.


HN itself is the ad for YC and a pretty effective one too.


In what sense is it effective? I'd been lurking here for months before I learned that YC was a company and it ran this place. (Then again I guess I'm not in any sort of relevant target group).


Money and power consolidate like a fundamental force of economics. Unsurprising that the 0.1% finds more in common with itself than hoi polloi.

What changed is that SV used to have neither power nor money.


> What changed is that SV used to have neither power nor money.

Surely SV had to have power (including knowledgeable people) and money to develop semiconductor manufacturing facilities (famously expensive). Not to mention the support of US federal government spending.


Copilot in excel is really awful.


Thank god! Enough Medea, already! I chalk this up as a win for humanity.


Sure, but think about all of the jobs that won't exist because this studio isn't being expanded, well beyond just whatever shows stop being produced. Construction, manufacturing, etc.

Edit: Also this doesn't mean less medea, just less actual humans getting paid to make medea or work adjacent jobs


Not like there's nothing else to construct.

Maybe it's time to construct some (high[er] density) housing where people want to live? No? Okay, then maybe next decade ... but then let's construct transport for them so they can get to work, how about some new subway lines? Ah, okay, not that either.

Then I guess the only thing remains to construct is all the factories that will be built as companies decouple from China.


Your emotional support animal in the [airplane|restaurant|movies] causes me stress and anxiety.

Why do your rights supersede mine?


Because the pitbull moms are a reliable voting bloc.


The people who are reacting with

> ugh I hate ads. Bye ChatGPT subscription!

are merely two years ahead of you in the product lifecycle. All advertising is spam. It is a cancer that gobbles up all host environments until nothing but ad content is left.


The web you enjoy today would simply not exist without advertising.


I don't enjoy the web today; I curse the way it has been enshittified. I accept that, because I live in a society, much of what is necessary is currently most frictionlessly accomplished in this psychologically manipulative hellscape.

I enjoyed the web of 3 decades ago, prior to advertising.


The web of 3 decades ago, so 1994, when the entire web was 3,000 websites?

I feel like the world has collectively forgotten that the web has virtually always been ad-supported. The entire dot com boom and bust was all about ads, and -that- started in 1995.

If you want that 1994 web feeling again, BBSs are alive and well


Yes, the web of 3 decades ago. The pre-advertising web. When there were barriers to entry. When there weren't bots, driven by profit motives.

I don't know why you continue to debate my lived experiences and personal preferences.


Neuralink has entered the...dream?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: