The tl;dr bot that pops up on every link to an article on Lemmy is depriving those websites of clicks, which deprives them of ad revenue.

The only thing that will accomplish is forcing those websites to do the very thing that we rail about; replacing their writers with crappy A.I because they can’t afford to pay for actual content.

We rail against the enshitification of the internet, but when there’s a legitimate way to fight back by giving these websites a page view/read/click etc… so that they can attract advertisers, we would rather have a bot summarize it for us, giving them nothing.

55 points

The tl;dr bot that pops up on every link to an article on Lemmy is depriving those websites of clicks, which deprives them of ad revenue.

For me its the opposite. Without the summary bot I wouldn’t even bother going to the site to read the whole article. Clickbait headlines are so ubiquitous I’m not going to go to sites without at least a decent change the content advertised is as described. The bot does that, and I click through to the site to read the whole article as the author intended it to be consumed.

Some bot summaries are blocked by a front end CDN. Usually skip those lemmy posts entirely.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Yeah it’s the same for me. Most of the time I don’t open links to third parties, and when I do it’s often to skim the introduction to see if the information is worth the read. But TLDRs are like trailers; they let me know what’s going on and can sell me on the full thing if it’s interesting.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

I don’t like the tldr bot because the summaries are awful. Too much context is removed, quotes are partially copied… It’s doing a bad job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I agree it does a bad job of providing a whole summation of the article, and the key context is removed on occasion. This is why I never depend on just the bot summary. It tells me enough that I should investigate further or skip the article.

Oddly, in this case this makes the bot better for the point that @Adderbox76@lemmy.ca is making. If the summary to TOO good, there wouldn’t be a need to click through to the article. However the bot is just good enough that you can tell there is real thought the author of the article put in, and some of the jarring cuts the bot makes me interested to click through to see what the article author is actually saying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points
*

I love the tl;dr; bot because it:

  • doesn’t pop up a ‘read our newsletter’ prompt that receives an auto-close click anyway
  • doesn’t pop up a separate prompt to subscribe to the news site using payment methods I simply don’t have because I’m not a credit card addicted American
  • doesn’t throw a consent form at me in yet another popup, in which I need to manually click away 308 vendors to which I do not want to sell my soul
  • doesn’t include useless Facebook-Like buttons that collect data about me even though I don’t even have a fucking Facebook account
  • doesn’t need 8 seconds of JavaScript execution to render fucking text
  • doesn’t load a 8000×6000px image that contains absolutely zero information, but only serves to make me to scroll by one screen to get to the information I actually want
  • relieves me of the burden to follow a link just to find that that content isn’t available ‘because you’ve already met your quota.
  • provides the information concisely instead of using a truck load of unnecessary fill words just to meet an arbitrary 4000 word minimum.
permalink
report
reply
13 points
*

Don’t forget the unclosable and stoppable auto playing video built into the page that you don’t want from a text article!

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Or the autoplay video that you CAN stop, but when you scroll down the page it moves to the corner and starts playing again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
  • browser popup asking if you would like to receive notifications from random-site.c om
permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

If these websites offered their articles in good faith I’d have no problem giving them a click, but the reality is that even just visiting these sites, users can get exposed to incredibly invasive trackers, data collectors, and an uncomfortable amount of stimuli (which some people are very sensitive to). I do sympathize with the points you bring up, but people don’t prefer tl;dr bots for no reason.

permalink
report
reply

If the articles didn’t

A. Have to hit a minimum word count so they use weird language and spend a great deal talking about nothing and

B. Didn’t wall more than the first paragraph off to subscribers

I wouldn’t need or want the summarization. But also mostly because I use an ad blocker anyway so the page is readable. If I didn’t have the adblocker, the page is usually so full of banners and full page ads that it’s impossible to read.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

You can blame the bot for decreased ad revenue all you’d like but it’s malarkey.

Websites have poisoned the well, so to say. It is simply not smart to browse these sites without ad blockers. Constant popups, cookie banners with 100s of toggles, flashing ads for random junk, and so on were driven by greed originally and are now driven by survival. If the greed could have subsided just a bit and website owners not tried to make all the money, people wouldn’t need to use tldr bots or adblockers.

Sorry not sorry, fuck your ad supported content.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Yeah, gotta agree. Sites got greedy. One or two out of the way ads on the top or side? Didn’t care, show them. Go to any news site or article now and you get top, bottom, every paragraph, flashing, pop up, when you go top left to close, and also accept cookies plz.

No, they’re the ones to blame for making the web like this. They ruined ad revenue themselves, they can figure out a new way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The problem is that people hate pay walls even more than ads.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Unpopular Opinion

!unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.

If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it’s something that’s widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)
  • If your post is a “General” unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS

Politics is everywhere. Let’s make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.

Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...

Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.

This shouldn’t need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

Community stats

  • 1.8K

    Monthly active users

  • 432

    Posts

  • 15K

    Comments