this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2023
22 points (82.4% liked)

Selfhosted

40040 readers
943 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
22
[IDEA] self-hosted advertisements for personal sites (programming.dev)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by zolax@programming.dev to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

so I was looking at someone's personal website from Mastodon, and noticed that they had banners to advertise other people's servers. while server lists like fediring exist, I was thinking of a more automatic method of advertisement within someone's website.

the concept is this: people could store advertisements (small banners, gifs) on their websites with a server and people willing to embed them could use an API to retrieve a random ad onto their website.

people would self-host their ads and "federate" with other websites to embed other ads on their website. not sure if this would scale up as well, though.

what do you think? just curious on lemmy's POV

edit: going by the comments, this idea is quite flawed and webrings (in small sizes) are a better approach.

thanks for the help

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are numerous problems other:

  • content governance
  • format standardization
  • malvertisement prevention
  • XSS possibility
  • Loading time to different advertiser's server (subject to implementation)
  • Revenue (if monetary based, which may involve going down the cryptocurrency, tracking/privacy, ad fruad, etc. rabbit hole)
  • Ad blockers

That's what I think of off of my head.

[–] zolax@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. people would choose individual websites (likely their friends) to host ads of, although list making would be problematic
  2. ideally would just serve images or gifs with as simple an API as possible
  3. similar idea to point 1 but abuse of such a system would be an issue (eg. a website is hacked and changed to inappropriate ads). one of the concept's main implications
  4. similar idea to point 2: videos could also be problematic though
  5. potentially some form of client-side (website) caching? this whole thing is just an idea, so I really don't know how it work
  6. no revenue - and therefore breaches of privacy and tracking would be unlikely - as the servers would be individually hosted, and therefore decentralised. however, this approach would make it significantly easier for malicious parties to pay users for ads.
  • as to whether or not that happens would be the user's decision, although (at least right now) such advertising sounds more costly and hard to enforce.
  1. you're right that ad-blockers could (although probably not at first) be used to block ads, as the ads would be for other personal websites (no real ad protection needed as per point 6), some could unblock them knowing that they would be more ethical (again, just a concept). this would be a problem though as most visitors would have an ad-blocker regardless.

thanks for the points