Hacker News Reader

Comment by blazespin | Hacker News Reader

Surreal. What's wrong with ad blocking? Maybe it would have created a market for micropayments which maybe it's far superior to ads? I know on my MIFI which charges insane amounts for wifi, anything that blocks popup videos or images while maintaining text and formatting is definitely loved by me.

View on HN

There was another post he wrote about Peace a few days ago:

>I don’t feel good making one and being the arbiter of what’s blocked.

He doesn't have a problem with ad blocking, but doesn't want to be the one deciding what's blocked and what isn't

http://www.marco.org/2015/09/18/just-doesnt-feel-good

I don't buy this at all! Sell the App to someone who is prepared to fight the war .. marco has sold things before and knows how easy it is. (I have sold many apps, etc. Trust me.. it is very very easy)

My little hunch-o-maker tells me there is an untold part to this story and he's just trying to distract us from his real reasons.

If I were to guess, it was his tumblr/yahoo connections that reached out to him and asked him not do this. If he made a lot of money off of tumblr as a founder, than yeah, it'd be pretty sucky to build something that would hurt that product.

If it's an issue where he simply doesn't enjoy the feeling of creating Peace, as he says, selling it isn't a solution for that problem.

> What's wrong with ad blocking?

It gives Google a monopoly in selling users' private data. Nobody can ad-block Google. (And Google Analytics.)

> Maybe it would have created a market for micropayments which maybe it's far superior to ads?

Believe me, if micropayments were a viable thing, then ad networks would be the first to jump ship. The current intrusive advertising model doesn't make anyone happy, ad networks included. (Ad networks don't profit from intrusive malware advertising. This is a 'tragedy of the commons' scenario, too much advertising hurts ultimately hurts the ad network bottom line.)

>Nobody can ad-block Google. (And Google Analytics.)

What do you mean by this? (I've had google-analytics.com in my /etc/hosts file for many years.)

I think the way Marcos Arment writes indicates that he is unwilling to have an opinion on anything which could cause above some threshold of harm. Which is a fine position to take if you don't feel up to the task of policymaking. Let someone else take up the position.

He explained his decision in a previous post. I think it's more interesting to focus on him as an example of doing something difficult because he felt it was the right thing to do.

His reasoning is unsound. Crippling user experience for some vague, completely unsupported belief that content can't be supported by anything except ads is hugely misguided.

Maybe content could be 10x valuable (because much of the noise would be eliminated) if micropayments had a chance to take off. Who knows! Let the market figure it out... For Marco to think he can penetrate the mists of the internet economy single handedly is the height of arrogance.

It is hugely misguided. Obviously, there is strong demand for ad-blocking. Someone else will move into this space and serve that demand. He didn't make a statement, he made a headache for all the people who downloaded his app, and for Apple who now has to refund all their purchases.

There is demand for all sorts of products you personally are capable of building, yet wouldn't for reasons of personal ethics. Should we judge you on your failure to bring these to market? After all, if you don't build it someone else will.

Please.

He went from the position of deciding which ads to block for a handful of people to hundreds of thousands literally overnight and decided that was too much responsibility for himself to handle. Whether or not you agree with his reasoning is immaterial. It made him feel uncomfortable to be in this position, so he made the decision to bow out.

Marco is not the first person, nor will he be the last, to regret the possible consequences of having built a weapon of war. He's simply in the enviable scenario of being able to destroy the schematics.

I thought he was using Ghost's ad lists? I don't think he was making the decisions of which to block at all. He just made the tool that enabled those defined blocks to be made.

That's a fair point. However, by proxying that list to his users, he's still in the position of choosing which ads to block — even if he's delegating that authority to others (in essence, he's choosing who chooses).

True, since he did make some kind of agreement with Ghost (if I recall correctly) basically making a partnership on that end.

You have just constructed a giant straw man that does not in any way reflect his actual stated reasoning for pulling the app.

He is not opposed to ad blocking. He is not opposed to ad blocking apps. He doesn’t think people blocking ads are acting immorally. He doesn’t think overbearing ads aren’t a problem or are definitely needed.

Figuring out the actual reason he states for withdrawing the app is left as an exercise to the reader.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com