231–240 of 580 posts
I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freeloading? You're missing the point; we're not catering to your sense of entitlement.
So where is your magical solution that puts food on the table of the content creators but doesn't rely on selling user data or displaying ads?
If they can't get people to pay for their content, maybe they should consider a line of work they can monetize without subjecting every single transaction to third-party skimming and engendering massive surveillance projects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you're willing to pay out of your own pocket for all these things you enjoy, right? Right? Right?
Right. Sell premium movie ticket prices that do not have ads (although I like previews, those can stay). Sell me a subscription to duckduckgo, payable in bitcoins or similar. Paywall every newspaper website. These are far more honest approaches in my view.
Why is an advert for a film that you don't need to see, better than an advert for a product that you don't need to own?
Is anyone else concerned about the possibility that if ad blocking on the web becomes widespread enough, we will end up with more ads baked into the content itself? Native advertising, ads burned into images, ads burned in the middle of videos? Thinking selfishly, I would much prefer the status quo, where I can block most ads, but the majority of consumers don't do it. Current ad blocking tech is fine, I'm afraid thi…
In general, you can Greasemonkey anything. Tracker-less first party native ads may be harder to match, but most sites would need tracking to aggregate audiences, to get better ads and revenue, so third party native is on the rise. And it is easy to block.
This however does not tackle the mindset shift that needs to occur for the masses to start protecting the private information they voluntarily give up on services they are signed in on the social net.
We are currently working on a project that will use this information to the marketer's advantage in a way that will make people sick once they realize the extent of the profiling going on, with the ultimate goal of reversing the trend before it's too late. Make people raise their guards, sell some tech on the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't emphasize this enough. Every time someone rattles out a list of "annoyances" regarding ads, I wish that I could plead with them to consider that there's even bigger reasons. Plenty of people try to sell the idea that ads let us have content "for free", and that all we have to tolerate is "a little annoyance". It's insane. If companies are buying ad-space, it's because they expect to get more business in retur…
There are certainly disgusting and slimy ads out there, but, to cite a recent example, if I am sent a 10% off coupon and I happen to want to buy a major appliance, am I wrong for choosing that store to buy it at over the others? Did they wrong me by giving out a discount? You can say that they 'manipulated' me into going to their store, but that's only because it was in my own interest to do so in the first place. If…
I firmly believe that the vast majority of ads out there are unarguably manipulative: feigning time-sensitivity to pressure people into purchasing, availing themselves of psychological tricks with color and attraction to retain eyeballs, purchasing praise and endorsements and passing it off as sincerity, etc.
I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…
Most adverts are trying to make you feel bad and that consuming their product will fill the hole they just made. Enough of these disgusting people.
They want to block ads that the person running a web site put on their web site with their own (Brave Ads Infused TM Ltd. Inc. - let's make some money while pretending we are freeing the world).
I will repeat this one more time, because Eich seems to be missing the point.[1] I don't adblock for privacy, security, or speed. Those are just nice-side effects. I adblock because I do not want to be manipulated into buying things I do not need. I wonder what would happen if, as a society, we said, "enough, no more ads". Would it really be the capitalist apocalypse that the ad industry is trying to make us believe…
It didn't impact the economy negatively. It makes the city way more pleasant to walk around.
This is specially annoying in "newspaper" sites, where content should be king (I mean, guys, you are already ton of money selling your printed version) and you are welcomed with a full page ad that is not related to the content nor my interests.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/03/clean-rio-stripping...