Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking • Hacker News Board

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#11

Post by ashark » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:23 PM UTC

fulafel wrote: post #4

The whole current conversation about this is weird. Why are people acting like ad blockers are new when iOS, a mobile platform with a small market share, stops banning them and gets back in line with everyone else?

A lot of sites receive a huge percentage of their views from iOS devices. Way, way more than Android/iOS/WinMobile/Desktop market share stats might lead one to suppose.

Not that I'm anti-adblocker—src attributes are a suggestion—just guessing why people might be freaking out about this.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#12

Post by AdmiralAsshat » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:24 PM UTC

So did the WP guy literally just pound out this article in the last hour, or did Mozilla inform the press about Focus before the announcement went live?

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#13

Post by Karunamon » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:28 PM UTC

randall wrote: post #9

Why is there no opt-in ad blocker? "eff these guys i'm blocking their ads." Or like if your resources go over some threshold they get blocked? I want to punish bad actors, not all.

Run any of the common apps like uBlock and disable the filter lists that come with it, then just add sites as you go. Same effect.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#14

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

oldmanjay wrote: post #6

There is no ethical dilemma on the user side. No web user guarantees making any particular request, and no one is owed the viability of a business model. The ethics of defending the descent of the ad system into such destructive behavior is an interesting discussion, perhaps.

[deleted]

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#15

Post by pjc50 » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

randall wrote: post #9

Why is there no opt-in ad blocker? "eff these guys i'm blocking their ads." Or like if your resources go over some threshold they get blocked? I want to punish bad actors, not all.

Ironically, the whole advertising system is set up to identify the viewer to the advertiser, not the other way round.

I built my own "opt in" by watching the status bar for slow loading sites and using the DOM inspector on visually annoying ads, then adding the host to my hosts file. It's very short: basically just google, doubleclick, outbrain, taboola.

http://pastebin.com/YAbJHe5j

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#16

Post by dikaiosune » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

Unless I'm mistaken, Focus is specifically a tracking blocker, right? As in, it's only a content blocker insofar as the advertisers are collecting data about visitors in addition to selling their page views? I really don't see the problem, and it's hard to take sites like WaPo seriously when editorializing about users trying to circumvent their ethically dubious revenue streams. I get that the whole media is in a crunch right now to figure out what to do about online advertising, but whitewashing the privacy invasions isn't helping.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#17

Post by 67726e » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

iaskwhy wrote: post #2

"Whomever you think is to blame for the sorry state of Web browsing, content blockers have a kind of ratcheting effect: Once you turn one on, chances are you won't see the kind of high-quality ads that might convince you to turn it off again. It also involves the risk that you'll miss whatever advertisers or publishers come up with to make the Web better again.", said no one ever.

I think StackOverflow is the only site I've visited with relevant ads that are not terribly intrusive. In fact that is the only site I've have Ad Block Plus disabled for. There are sites with good ads, but they are rare to the point that they might as well be considered to not exist.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#18

Post by cryoshon » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:30 PM UTC

What ethical dilemma? If you want to make money from me as a visitor to a website, create a paywall so I can decide to find the content elsewhere for free, or subscribe to you if I really, absolutely can't do without it. I will tell you now: I have been on the internet for my entire life and clicked less than a dozen ads in that time, most of which were pre-2010. I am not the only one who browses in this way-- hopefully there are millions more.

I block 100% of ads because I detest being hectored by attention-depleting visual waste. My position is ethical, because it improves my experience immensely by altering the set of data to reach my eyes that websites decide to offer to me for free. Once again, if websites or services want to get money from me, they can ask directly and change the terms of access.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#19

Post by dionidium » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:34 PM UTC

67726e wrote: post #17

iaskwhy wrote: post #2

"Whomever you think is to blame for the sorry state of Web browsing, content blockers have a kind of ratcheting effect: Once you turn one on, chances are you won't see the kind of high-quality ads that might convince you to turn it off again. It also involves the risk that you'll miss whatever advertisers or publishers come up with to make the Web better again.", said no one ever.

I think StackOverflow is the only site I've visited with relevant ads that are not terribly intrusive. In fact that is the only site I've have Ad Block Plus disabled for. There are sites with good ads, but they are rare to the point that they might as well be considered to not exist.

I actually think the ads on Facebook are done in a transparent and un-annoying way. Unfortunately, they only show me two things:

1. Geeky shirts with "clever" sayings on them (since they know I'm a programmer, I guess).

2. Things I've already recently bought on Amazon (or elsewhere).

In the first case, what they know about me leads to a severely mistaken impression regarding something else about me. In the second case, what they know about me is already outdated.

Re: Mozilla’s newest app perfectly captures the ethical dilemma of ad-blocking

#20

Post by ryandrake » Tue, Dec 08, 2015, 4:36 PM UTC

iaskwhy wrote: post #2

"Whomever you think is to blame for the sorry state of Web browsing, content blockers have a kind of ratcheting effect: Once you turn one on, chances are you won't see the kind of high-quality ads that might convince you to turn it off again. It also involves the risk that you'll miss whatever advertisers or publishers come up with to make the Web better again.", said no one ever.

That "ratcheting effect" is by design.

Similarly, anti-virus software has a "ratcheting effect" in that once you install them, you don't get to see the kind of high-quality viruses and trojans that might convince your computer to encrypt all your files or give up your bank passwords.

Installing an ad blocker has become another one of those "hygiene" steps that you do whenever you set up a new PC: Install Anti-virus, install OS-provided updates, install ad-blocker.