I think the problem is that when Archive.org has access to NYT and other publisher content, people can scrape NYT content at scale from Archive.org even when they cannot do so directly on NYT. If Archive.org blocks scrapers, maybe the publishers would make different choices and allow Archive.org access.
Cloudflare is most active in pushing standards, and highlighting the issue of bots scraping web pages for free. That said, the other major CDNs (e.g. Akamai, Fastly) also have Bot Management functionality, so hopefully this is not a gatekeeping scenario, more of a standards-building scenario.
Maybe ban AI-generated responses from users, but post AI-generated responses (generated by HN) that are clearly marked as generated, that can be upvoted by users. These responses could live within the comment thread, or separately (to the side), with the ability for users to filter out these responses if they wish.
BuiltWith says that the CMS used at forums.lenovo.com is from Lithium Technologies, and it was first detected in July, 2012. I'm not sure if this is the forum software, or something else.
But.. that's what I want! e.g. 1C flour = 120g, 1C sugar = 200g. If you parse the recipe, it cannot be that hard to do a conversion based on ingredient, and such a value add!
Since OnlyRecipe.app is already parsing the recipe site, it would be a great feature to allow conversion to weights from volume (e.g. show 120g of flour vs. 1c of flour). Also, allow someone to double (or 1.5x...) the recipe as well, and have all measures double in the recipe!
I used it a few years ago with my former company. It effortlessly injected 10K rows of data per second, and we configured Druid over 50 dimensions and about 20 different metrics. In that configuration, Druid was able to respond to most queries within a second. I am not sure how it works but it is an amazing product. We are evaluating it now for use at my current company.
I have equal amounts of friends (in NYC) talking about their early stage startup investments (Doubleclick! Pinterest!) or their successful stock investments - e.g. the Facebook IPO or buying into Amazon in 2003.
Increasingly people (esp. Millennials) consider ethics and values toward the top when deciding whether to purchase or use a product.
Why wouldn't they get together and shame a company when that company acts against their own moral values? Is the best possible solution to wait until the first Tuesday in November and hope for the best? I am sure many will also vote, call their elected officials, go to a protest. They'll also sign online petitions.
Agree. I have used the term "incrementality" to communicate the incremental benefit of a given ad compared to a control whereas the article uses "advertising effect". Measurement is also difficult because every ad platform grades their own homework (they each have analytics that attributes sales to their platforms liberally).
It is important for a brand to have their own attribution platform that measures incrementality as well as the relative contribution each ad exposure makes toward a given sale.
Both of these things are possible to measure. The problem is that the band of users that display positive ROI (when incrementality is measured) is so small that people don't believe the data.
Additionally, brand exposure is hard to measure and almost completely ignored in digital advertising. Over time I imagine that there will be more research in this area (beyond just measuring an in-view ad impression)
I think that many people who work in ad tech are in favour of GDPR. They have seen the mishandling of personal data on a massive scale first hand. This is true in my case.
London did this a while ago and traveling around the city is much more pleasant. There is a case to be made that a congestion charge makes a city more habitable.
Look at the changes that have occurred with Washington Post in the five years since Bezos bought them. Pretty clear that WaPo benefitted from Bezos' leadership.
I think that the value is "adding another provider" to the market, where in many places there is only one or two choices for internet, from entrenched providers with low levels of service.
The goal is for display ads to not suck to the point where Adblock, Adblock Plus, and Ghostery are required.
For better or worse, advertising pays for the salaries of the people who write the stories and build the websites and apps that people use. The goal is not to remove ads altogether but to improve display advertising so that it is a positive improvement to a site rather than the negative effect that it has on user experience today (yes, advertising can be positive addition to content - ask anyone who reads Vogue magazine).
Google won search advertising because ads were relevant, looked good, and it was simple for advertisers to reach the users they wanted. The major reason for Google's success is because they owned every piece in the advertising stack:
- The content (e.g. google.com)
- The adserver
- The auction engine
- Fraud detection (Google's quality team's success at removing fraud meant that advertisers trusted that their messages were reaching users)
- Creative adserver (e.g. text ads and creatives are served by Google)
In display advertising, each of these pieces is operated by a different party. This means that integration between each of the pieces is not a tight, giving users and advertisers a low quality experience. Here are some of the effects of this:
1. Ads generally cannot be tailored to the website where they run. Publishers do not have the ability to tailor ads to work within their environment like they can with Google Adsense (native advertising is starting to change this though) - so most websites look bad with display ads.
2. There is massive data leakage from ads. Because a 3rd party adserver is serving the ad on a publisher site, it is nearly impossible for publishers to keep their customer data from leaking to everyone in the ad stack, which quickly becomes everybody in the ad industry.
Because ad networks that buy the publisher ad space from a publisher almost never actually serve the ad creative (they just serve an ad tag to another network), a massive circle of redirects where a single ad can be bought and sold over 100 times before an ad is displayed. This means that the publisher is giving their customer data to 100 companies before they get an ad on a page.
3. There is no industry wide coordinated ad fraud effort that is successful. There are so many ways for ad fraud to occur in many different parts of the ad stack, that a single company that tries to reduce fraud from a single point in the ad stack will only have limited success.
4. Ad creative does not have rigid controls where the publisher can let the advertiser know what can and cannot be done on their site. This means that either an ad seems to 'take over' the publisher page without adding to the user experience, or an ad is reduced to a backup image, which is not a pleasing experience.
A reduced set of advertising features needs to be done much better in order for display advertising budgets grow from where they are now.
Second this. Seems like the second most important thing behind the movie ranking is its availability on Netflix, Amazon, AppleTV - e.g. I want to find the best ranked movie on Netflix or Amazon Prime.