tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post5725761664351003132..comments2024-03-28T17:08:26.448+00:00Comments on Featherweight Musings: Directory tiles, incentivisation, and indirectionUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-77405707580911942732021-12-22T04:15:59.165+00:002021-12-22T04:15:59.165+00:00Nicee blog you haveNicee blog you haveZane Dhttps://www.zanedyer.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-68164491396108968532014-03-12T10:28:50.051+00:002014-03-12T10:28:50.051+00:00In many ways the search box itself is an ad, for G...In many ways the search box itself is an ad, for Google search (where Google get their revenue from is largely irrelevant for this discussion). Presumably you don't consider it an ad because it is providing a useful service.<br /><br /><i>"with the current system, in order to maximise search traffic and thus income, we might tweak our design to make the search box more prominent or otherwise encourage more users to search via the search box"</i><br /><br />That would be a good example of changing the application to suit the advertiser rather than the user. It's a difficult line, but Mozilla has stays well on the user-friendly side of it so far, and I trust them to continue that behaviour.Ian Tommins (thelem)https://www.blogger.com/profile/10607392410619565604noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-5069982438048827282014-03-12T10:27:40.978+00:002014-03-12T10:27:40.978+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ian Tommins (thelem)https://www.blogger.com/profile/10607392410619565604noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-55590220677468302452014-03-12T09:48:10.318+00:002014-03-12T09:48:10.318+00:00first of all, i think ads are "a good thing&q...first of all, i think ads are "a good thing", at least when done well. people often seek out and watch ads on their own (viral ads, apple ads), and they are the most popular part of the most popular show in the us (superball). <br /><br />second, ads are democratic. limiting access to the whole sum of human knowledge only to those who can afford it is simply unfair and inhumane.<br /><br />when presented in the right way, ads are often "information", or "content". think google adwords, or people who read fashion magazines partly for the ads..<br /><br />and btw, this "newfound polution" you speak of is nothing new. check out this 110+ year old photo: http://i.imgur.com/Nh3CR.jpg<br /><br /><br />"I think the point about incentivisation and indirection is still valid."<br /><br />i'm pretty sure google would pay us much more if we agreed to remove search engine choice from firefox. that would be a direct incentive to do worse (for our users), and get more money, but i doubt anyone at mozilla would even propose such a solution.<br /><br />more ads does not necessarily mean more money. first of all, exclusivity is worth something, so we should be able to charge more for each ad spot when there are less of them on a page; and second, too much ads might annoy users, and less users gets us less total revenue. so your "direct incentive" argument is not so clear in my mind.tom jonesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-56275692663424196162014-03-12T05:18:20.249+00:002014-03-12T05:18:20.249+00:00A Flattr-like system where you could set $X per mo...A Flattr-like system where you could set $X per month going towards your browsing and each site you visit gets rewarded with a percentage of that X based on the total sites visited could be an option. Currently Flattr is useful but not ubiquitous enough. You can just Flattr random sites and have them collect funds when they find out about it.cajbirnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-8683651718276153712014-03-12T03:11:09.486+00:002014-03-12T03:11:09.486+00:00Gavin, thanks for the comment:
I thought the curr...Gavin, thanks for the comment:<br /><br />I thought the current behaviour was that every page you view a page it replaces an empty tile, so unless a user visits the new tab page and then closes it again without visiting another page (or visits exactly the same page as previously visited), after nine views, all tiles will be filled. Of course I only use an empty profile every few months, so I'm probably wrong.<br /><br />I have seen the argument raised, possibly (hopefully) not by Mozilla people. Even if it is a straw man, I think the point about incentivisation and indirection is still valid.<br /><br />Like I said, I have more faith in Mozilla to do this than any other organisation. But over the long run, even the best intentions can give way to immediate, practical needs, especially where money is concerned. It seems to be human nature. I hope I am being too pessimistic.Nick Cameron.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04760749052780174977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36017112.post-37011062408364809342014-03-12T02:58:44.160+00:002014-03-12T02:58:44.160+00:00Not sure where you get "[new users will see t...Not sure where you get "[new users will see the ads] at most nine times" from - they will see them potentially much more than that, depending on how much they use about:newtab and how quickly they accumulate history (i.e. bump out default tiles with new "most visited" ones).<br /><br />"Google makes money with ads and we get money from Google so we're already all-in on advertising" seems like a straw man - I don't think anyone is seriously using that as rationale for why Directory Tiles are OK (and if they are, I agree that they're wrong).<br /><br />The rest of your argument seems to depend on the assumption that Mozilla is not able to define boundaries about which incentives we let impact our behavior in which ways, and that seems overly pessimistic.Gavin Sharphttp://gavinsharp.comnoreply@blogger.com