I must agree with you and tzaman on this. In a time when we are fighting hard to protect our personal privacy online, companies like this are trying to take more of it away. I hope beyond hope that this company fails miserably!
That this is even a debate is preposterous to me. I am a buyer. I love to shop. I also love the internet. What I don't love is being FORCED to view advertising I have no desire to view. Is advertising a right? If so, I've certainly never heard of it. I personally could not care less if internet advertisers dropped dead of starvation. They have no inherent right to follow me around to check out what I am doing in my personal time just so they can MAYBE get me to buy something that will put money in their pockets and food in their mouths. I think it is time to send advertisers a message (SOPA/PIPA style). I think it is time to send congress a message that states that we DO NOT WANT forced advertising and we will not be silent until we get it. Opt-In is the only acceptable choice for a free society.
I certainly understand the ad industry wanting to make enough money to eat. I also understand the importance of advertising. It is a great way to raise capital while offering viewers a chance to see what products and services are out there. It is also a great way to financially support a site. I have made many purchases due to great advertising. But is it really their right to force ads on us while we have no right to a simple "leave me alone" button? Maybe there could be an option version of "do not track" that allows advertising based on the SITE information or adblocking that removes ALL ads. Then let the consumer choose. I would certainly accept a non-tracking option most of the time. Am I completely unique in this?
As for the argument that viewers will not opt-in to advertising, I simply laugh. I use "do not track" and ad blocking implementations extensively. However, I turn it off (my version of opting in to advertising) for family birthdays, anniversaries, and especially holidays. How else will I find the best deals? However, the rest of the time, I have absolutely no desire to see any Web page containing 50% (conservative for some sites) advertising. Unless I am completely unique in this world, I cannot imagine that I am the only individual who does this.
Again, why is a consumers right to be tracked or advertised versus a company's right to track me and advertise to me even a debate?
I can't get behind this. It's just some ads, chill out. Advertisers have the right to advertise and you have the right to ignore the advertising. Advertising is a form of speech just as the content you're going to the site to see. You say you understand the advertising industry and that sites are able to stay in business because they make money on the ads they show you but then you go on to basically say you think they have no right to do it. This sounds like entitlement to me. If I want to advertise on my own website then I shouldn't be stopped from doing so just because someone comes along and has a real hardline opinion on the matter.
You're also not being forced to view advertising in the same way you're not being forced to visit a website. To make this into some kind of high ideal/moral/philosophy is just silly. They're just ads. Go get adblock, don't click on the ads, or just stop visiting the sites that have them. A site you really like shows ads and so you think you're backed into a corner? No way. No site is obligated to present content to you in the way you like it. There's way too many people these days shouting about how they want their FREE internet services just the way they want it like it's their right or something. It's not anyone's right.
Now tracking, that's a different story. We should all have the right to opt out of tracking if we don't want it. But to say we should never have to see an ad because it might annoy us is just ridiculous.
OK, advertising is speech, sure (I suppose). But, there's no right to demand that anyone listen to you; I am still free to peel the logo off my car, remove the tag from my shirt, fast-forward past commercials, tear pages out of magazines.
And that's the problem with trying to use protected speech as a defense for advertising: all that does is protect your right to use it; it does not force me to also use it. Once the content is loaded on my browser, on my computer, I have the right to do with it whatever I please -- including automatically block any of the pieces that I don't want.
You're free to have advertising on your site. I'm free to not download any of it. Freedom is great!
Bravo for Rep. Zoe Lofgren!! It's about time someone in congress grew a brain and started actually asking constituents opinions on legislation!! I think this is a wonderful idea that will hopefully grow as more government officials begin to realize that WE are the smart ones and THEY represent US.
So far, you have an attractive background and a call to action. There is no explanation whatsoever regarding what I will get when I sign up. I'm a bit crazy, but I'm not stupid. Although, I have to say that the concept of having a virtual "hangout" could be nice if done correctly. You just need to let us know what to expect prior to asking for personal information.
Thanks for the feedback. Just wondering did you see or click on the learn more link? I guess I want to know whether the the copy on the learn more page is not descriptive enough or no one really clicked on it. Thanks again!
The "learn how" link is a call to action but you really haven't given enough info for me to want to click it.
Also, it suffers from a bit of a design-color challenge. The shade of blue you've picked doesn't provide enough contrast against the background image. I'd suggest playing with all of your text and image there to increase the contrast between the two.
After clicking the "learn how" link you have the same contrast problem. It also doesn't offer enough details for me to understand what it really does or why I'd want to use it.
Your content seems to fall into a common marketing problem. You're highlighting features, not benefits. All I care about is benefits, not features.
Its real simple folks. Refuse to do business with Amazon or any affiliates (sites hosted with AWS, amazon affiliates). It was once said if you are not a part of the solution, you are part of the problem. The solution is to make Amazon feel your displeasure in their bottom line.
It is pathetic what we have allowed corporations to do to us when we are the one's providing them the power to do it. Maybe we, as a society, have just become too lazy and complacent to worry about being trampled on?
Well said. I think it's sad that the mind behind Apple technology is getting forgotten while the marketer gets all the glory. I, too, hope Woz is right and the case gets overturned on appeal.
I am also noticing the shift to Android in my circles. This could be a good thing.
I don't think Woz is in danger of getting forgotten anytime soon. In fact, given that the last technical contribution he made to Apple was, as far as I recall, about 30 years ago, it seems to me that is getting rather generous credit for Apple's success.
This is the inherent problem with free, open Internet. I would not change it one bit. Unfortunately, Hacker News is only one of many places like this. It's the same reason I left Stack Exchange long ago.
However, I do feel your pain. I think it is disgusting that people have plenty of time to destroy your hard work, but have not time at all to offer the tiniest bit of encouragement. I've noticed it happening more and more often as well. I'm just not sure why people cannot simply be polite to each other.
Every time I read about tech companies taking away our ability to have some resemblance of privacy I get more infuriated. We've allowed big business to control how we create new technologies, then we abuse the people we depend on to use it.
It is almost like we are begging for governments to create laws in the interest of protecting peoples rights, without acknowledging that we are the ones responsible for bills like SOPA/PIPA. We create the need for protection, then we bitch about how it is implemented.
Want to make technology better? Quit abusing your users.
If you want to know how effective terrorism really is, just try to take a U.S. domestic flight to anywhere. Terrorism is so effective even law enforcement now call drug dealers "narco-terrorists" in an attempt to incense the people against them. Right, wrong, or indifferent, these are the facts. Since Sept. 11, the U.S. has changed dramatically willfully giving over basic rights in the name of security. And terrorism doesn't work?
I don't recall ever hearing a viewer / user complain about what the developer called the thing. I also don't remember ever reading a blog where a start-up founder obsessed over it, although I'm sure there's been one or two that we never heard of.
Therefore, I simply don't think about it and typically just use "login". It's recognizable, it simple, and users know what to do with it. Everything else is simply keeping you away from the more important parts of your project. Just one man's opinion.
