zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. INTPen+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-04-08 12:53:51
Hardly the type of intrusive advertising that sparked these discussions.
replies(2): >>amazin+o >>the_ot+J1
2. amazin+o[view] [source] 2025-04-08 12:55:42
>>INTPen+(OP)
funny enough, it's in the eye of the beholder.
replies(2): >>INTPen+U1 >>daniel+n2
3. the_ot+J1[view] [source] 2025-04-08 13:02:37
>>INTPen+(OP)
How do you encode that in law such that it won't be abused?
replies(1): >>INTPen+72
◧◩
4. INTPen+U1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-08 13:03:17
>>amazin+o
Everything is but I think if we're to generalize then plastering an entire square in billboards and having a tiny text at the bottom of a very simple HTML page are two wildly different things.
replies(1): >>amazin+92
◧◩
5. INTPen+72[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-08 13:03:58
>>the_ot+J1
That's a challenge I'd leave for much smarter people than me.

But it is a good point. If this were to make it into law then we need some sort of threshold.

◧◩◪
6. amazin+92[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-08 13:04:06
>>INTPen+U1
not really. you could argue that if you're 2-3 feet from a monitor the text on the bottom of a full screen HN page takes more of your vision than a billboard 500ft away.
◧◩
7. daniel+n2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-08 13:05:16
>>amazin+o
It is largely in the intent of the advertiser.
[go to top]