• Sergio@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Businesses get on board and start the horrible ad infestation

    There were a couple years where businesses were “entering cyberspace” and still trying to figure it out. Mostly this involved static webpages, since they saw the web as a kind of yellow pages. i.e. a business’ web page was their ad.

    people are apparently fine with ads

    It amazes me how accepting most people are of ads. I suspect Google’s going to win, and their ultimate contribution to humanity will be forcing ads into everything.

    • The_v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Why google became the dominate search engine in the first place was because every other search engine was an ad infested nightmare fuel.

      There is a limit of shit that people will put up with. Google is pushing that limit hard right now. Which is why I no longer use it.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Partially. Not really. Page Rank instantly obsoleted every other search algorithm in existence. Nobody was able to get high quality results right at the top so consistently. The ad-free part was a bonus, at least for a while.

    • Riskable@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      People are accepting of ads because ads are literally everywhere. A world without ads would be very strange indeed!

      Every logo that exists and every product that has its own name/brand printed on it is an ad. Every product name in a catalog or simple list is an ad.

      A world without ads would be like hundreds of years ago when you could buy soap that just looked like soap with no labels and no packaging at all. When the only food you purchased was bare produce/meat (or the whole animal). But even then any assembled/manufactured product would have some sort of “maker’s mark”.

      I mean, how long have humans been branding cattle? That’s the original use of that term!

      • Sergio@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        That’s an excellent point. Hundreds of years ago, if you wanted to recomment the product of a particularly skilled soapmaker or farmer, you’d say “Jo made that”, and maybe you could point to Jo’s logo on the product so your friends knew how to recognize it. So the signifier of quality (the brand) pointed to the signified of a quality product. But now the signifier has become disentangled from the signified: the advertisements and marketing campaigns promote brand loyalty even if the product becomes worse through inferior ingredients or shrinkflation. Because of this, the signifier is presented to us when we do not want to see it.

      • zea@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        A logo’s very different from what I would consider an “ad”. I don’t mind logos existing, but anything pushed in my face is horrible and I hate it.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 hours ago

      It amazes me how accepting most people are of ads. I suspect Google’s going to win, and their ultimate contribution to humanity will be forcing ads into everything.

      People just eat up ‘personalized’ things so whoever coined ‘personalized ads’ was an evil genius.