The Internet is old enough to fit like a comfy shoe, and have it's own tired clichés, like:
[caption id="attachment_6453" align="alignright" width="150"]
An example of the T&A in TPB's ads.[/caption]
This, apparently three year old saying, is meant to refer to the free Internet services we all use, and how they make their money mining our personal data. Many people now see it as glibness masquerading as wisdom, a truism, verging on a platitude, but it continues to be true, all the same.
I use the open-source Adblock Plus Add-on for Firefox, along with, according to Wikipedia. about 16 million other Firefox users (ABP claims 30 million users). Sure it speeds up page loading, but I kind blame it's popularity on The Pirate Bay. Let's say I need to download, um, a Linux ISO file -- ya. right -- certainly nothing illegal. Anyway. I need to download this file in a public library, or a coffee shop. Have you seen the ads on TPB? I for one don't want to expose small, impressionable, children, and Presbyterians, to that sort of thing, so I use Adblock Plus, or that's how I thought it worked, except I never thought about it.
Turns out, the makers of ABP are using me. This eye-opening online Guardian item details how Eyeo, the German company behind Adblock Plus, is leveraging their large user base to literally extort money out of online services who rely on ad views for some or all of their revenue, that includes Google, which The Guardian say gets 90% of its revenue from showing ads, along with, basically, all social media, such as Facebook, and Twitter.
Eyeo actively approaches Internet companies with an offer to "partner" with them, in order to "engineer acceptable, non-intrusive advertising," to quote ABP's own "open letter blogpost to Twitter.
In a nutshell Eyeo's Adblock Plus is designed to block, or blacklist, all ads on Web sites that are not listed in the program's internal whitelist. Companies can get on that whitelist by adhering to Eyeo's Acceptable Ads guidelines, and... by handing over a share of their advertising revenues.
Eyeo apparently lets small companies off the hook, but, according to the Guardian item, for those Internet companies which pay -- including Google, Amazon and Yandex, Russia’s largest search engine -- the fee is 30% of the revenue generated by showing ads.
It sure sounds like a shakedown tactic, but, the other side of this issue is that Internet ads, unlike ads in mainstream media, are generally so deplorably "lowest common denoiminator," that no one want to see them. Adblock Plus' developers argue that they're using their power to create responsible advertising, that won't embarrass people browsing the Web in, say, a public library.
"If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold."
[caption id="attachment_6453" align="alignright" width="150"]
An example of the T&A in TPB's ads.[/caption]This, apparently three year old saying, is meant to refer to the free Internet services we all use, and how they make their money mining our personal data. Many people now see it as glibness masquerading as wisdom, a truism, verging on a platitude, but it continues to be true, all the same.
I use the open-source Adblock Plus Add-on for Firefox, along with, according to Wikipedia. about 16 million other Firefox users (ABP claims 30 million users). Sure it speeds up page loading, but I kind blame it's popularity on The Pirate Bay. Let's say I need to download, um, a Linux ISO file -- ya. right -- certainly nothing illegal. Anyway. I need to download this file in a public library, or a coffee shop. Have you seen the ads on TPB? I for one don't want to expose small, impressionable, children, and Presbyterians, to that sort of thing, so I use Adblock Plus, or that's how I thought it worked, except I never thought about it.
Turns out, the makers of ABP are using me. This eye-opening online Guardian item details how Eyeo, the German company behind Adblock Plus, is leveraging their large user base to literally extort money out of online services who rely on ad views for some or all of their revenue, that includes Google, which The Guardian say gets 90% of its revenue from showing ads, along with, basically, all social media, such as Facebook, and Twitter.
When business models collide
Eyeo actively approaches Internet companies with an offer to "partner" with them, in order to "engineer acceptable, non-intrusive advertising," to quote ABP's own "open letter blogpost to Twitter.
In a nutshell Eyeo's Adblock Plus is designed to block, or blacklist, all ads on Web sites that are not listed in the program's internal whitelist. Companies can get on that whitelist by adhering to Eyeo's Acceptable Ads guidelines, and... by handing over a share of their advertising revenues.
Eyeo apparently lets small companies off the hook, but, according to the Guardian item, for those Internet companies which pay -- including Google, Amazon and Yandex, Russia’s largest search engine -- the fee is 30% of the revenue generated by showing ads.
It sure sounds like a shakedown tactic, but, the other side of this issue is that Internet ads, unlike ads in mainstream media, are generally so deplorably "lowest common denoiminator," that no one want to see them. Adblock Plus' developers argue that they're using their power to create responsible advertising, that won't embarrass people browsing the Web in, say, a public library.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting stuff. I've used ABP for a long time and I recommend it to everyone. People with late model machines complain about advertising slowing their shiny new browsers to a limping crawl whereas my old clunker runs nicely. Magic. It might as well be considering how many people ignore my advice and opt for a new laptop. Heh.
And I've been wondering for awhile how the creators of ABP are monetising their work. Now I know. And I'm quite happy to keep using it and to be their product because I'm getting a genuine benefit.
BAAAAAAA ;)
Exactly. I think we're all in the same boat, and so what if we're helping a shark go after killer whales. Someone has to explain to me how we're not all better off for it.
The only disadvantage I can see - and it's a bit of a stretch - is to advertisers who rely on people who install ABP not bothering to modify the settings.
I do think the crying and howling from advertisers is a bit rich. It's my computer - and *I* will decide what runs on it and/or crashes it - especially when I'm paying by the megabyte for the privilege. If someone's figured out how to make a bit of cash while allowing me to do that - *shrug*
Which of course touches on the business of security and the fact that all that advertising that's served adds up to a huge attack vector. And we're not just talking about the red light portions of cyberspace either. "Respectable" sites are compromised via dodgy ad servers all the time. That's more to do with scripting and running NoScript but the two do go together.
It's a bit like allowing a fuel company to drive its tankers through your property as a condition of owning a car. Those car metaphors never work - but I think you get the idea...
The Internet continues to show us that the mass of people don't miss what they don't understand. They love the increased freedom they think they understand (particularly the "free" part), to email, download, blog, etc. They don't seem to care about the hidden costs, such as privacy, and security. I guess if knowledge gives you power then ignorance gives someone else power over you.
Yep... that's about the size of it. You could say it's not what you know or even who you know - it's what you *want* to know. I think that applies just as much to this week's Top 40 and the Kardashians too - although I don't see too much negative in not keeping up on those. Of course the people who loiter in supermarkets reading magazines might have a different opinion ;)
Always amazes how intelligent people can be when they want to know something, and how dumb when they don't. I'm my own best example. I was going to make a joke about "staying on top of the Kardashians," but -- oops, I just did.
HEH :D
I just saw this on another blog - it seemed fitting. http://basicinstructions.net/basic-instructions/2013/9/29/how-to-advise-someone-as-to-what-kind-of-computer-they-shoul.html