News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @05:54PM (#41793106)
I am in the market for a new scanner. I looked at advertisements for them.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by hightrix on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @06:32PM (#41793461)
Me too. I went to a store online that sells them and determined which one I wanted by features and reveiws.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @06:37PM (#41793525)
How did you know about a store that sells them?
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by hightrix on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @06:42PM (#41793560)
Searching the internet and not rendering any promoted links or ads in my browser.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @06:50PM (#41793646)
And why do you think that vendors create search-friendly pages? Advertising!

BTW, back in the olden days, magazines were sold, but the bulk of the magazine revenue came from advertising.

Without advertising, the magazines would have cost the consumer quite a bit more.

And, as someone who paid for ad placement in computer magazines, the sales directly corresponded to the advertising.

Why do you think Google provides you with free searches? It isn't because they are altruistic. It's because companies pay to advertise on it. If everybody installed an ad blocker like you, you'd find yourself having to pay for search.

Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by hightrix on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @06:59PM (#41793709)
Short and simple response.

> *Advertising in it's current form* is a plague on humanity.

Magazine ads were not highly targeted towards every user that bought one. We liked magazine ads, they were high quality and usually contextually relevant.

Modern advertising is nothing like magazine ads. We don't take screenshots of ads on webpages, print them out, and hang them on our walls like we did with magazine ads.

> Why do you think Google provides you with free searches?

To deliver ads. The same reason Google does everything else.

Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @07:44PM (#41794027)
What would you do without a search engine? Who do you think is going to pay for it?
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by PlattypusRex on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @08:38PM (#41794369)
Pay for Kagi or any other good, paid search engine, which is already superior to Google today?
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Thursday October 10, 2024 @02:27AM (#41796131)
Right, you get ads, or you pay. Businesses aren't charities.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by Apocryphon on Thursday October 10, 2024 @01:33PM (#41801183)
So the existence of for-pay search engines would disprove the assertion that advertisements are necessary, as there are alternate ways to find information and fund businesses that fetch you that information, without relying on ads.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by hightrix on Thursday October 10, 2024 @12:01PM (#41800235)
These are problems unrelated to the topic at hand. We aren't going to solve every bit of this situation in this comment thread.

Who pays for it? Not my problem. I'll use whatever free service exists, there will always be one.

Without a search engine? The internet would fail and targeted ads would cease to exist.

Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Thursday October 10, 2024 @01:17PM (#41801037)
> I'll use whatever free service exists

You'll get advertisements, then.

Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by Apocryphon on Thursday October 10, 2024 @04:25PM (#41803190)
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by shiroiushi on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @10:02PM (#41794784)
The reason people turned to ad-blockers is because the ads became too intrusive. They were fine (or at least bearable) when they were just simple text boxes next to your Google search results, or maybe when they were static banner ads. But then the advertisers came up with pop-ups, pop-unders, video ads, 2-hour long ads in the middle of YouTube videos, and all kind of other nasty shenanigans that hijacked your computer and rendered it completely unusable. The advertisers have only themselves to blame for ad-blockers.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Thursday October 10, 2024 @02:16AM (#41796065)
You can pay google and get ad free viewing.

I.e. if you don't want ads, you'll need to pay.

Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by account42 on Thursday October 10, 2024 @05:55AM (#41797256)
> And why do you think that vendors create search-friendly pages? Advertising!

No, Marketing. Advertising is only one form and the most antisocial one. There is a huge difference between making it possible for people interested in your product to find you versus going out of your way to shove your product in front of the eyes of people who are doing something at best tangentially related.

Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by WalterBright on Thursday October 10, 2024 @01:18PM (#41801049)
You won't be looking for a product you don't know exists.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by account42 on Friday October 11, 2024 @04:29AM (#41807481)
You won't be looking for a product you don't need. You will be looking for solutions if you have a need even if you don't know the specific product you need.
Re:US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case by account42 on Thursday October 10, 2024 @05:53AM (#41797246)
And without advertisements you would not have found a scanner to buy? Or are you conflating product listings with advertisements?