Re:Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)
by emmett on Thursday July 11, 2013 @02:38AM
(#6024768)
I'm not arguing against banning advertising. Actually, I think that would be a fine idea.
Just recognize that unless you do ban advertising, the result of this change will not be what's intended. The intended result is that websites, in general, stop tracking anonymous users. Instead, it will result in every user being explicitly tracked.
The most important issue here is that the political feasibility of reducing tracking of anonymous users is equivalent to the political feasibility of banning advertising.
(I'm slightly overselling here -- in reality, a good amount of advertising of the "sponsorship" form would still work. But the impact would be large enough that most websites would force login as I describe rather than stop tracking people.)
Re:Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)
by nine_k on Wednesday July 10, 2013 @02:47AM
(#6017873)
It will also kill most "free content" websites that live off the ads revenue. Are you ready for paywalls everywhere, even if subscription is 25 � / mo?
Re:Why HTTP/2.0 does not seem interesting (2012)
by lambda on Wednesday July 10, 2013 @09:41AM
(#6019384)
Your symbol comes out as a Unicode replacement character for me. What was it supposed to be?
If this is really a non-starter for advertisers, then mandating it will effectively ban advertising, non?
Remember: your business model is not sacrosanct! Disruption!