131–140 of 217 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Adblock Plus does that. Ad networks can in some fashion request their ads be unblocked, and ABP does some sort of review (I'm not sure how it all works, I don't use it).
Ad networks pay ABP to be whitelisted. That is their review process.
I don't particularly care about whether they can buy flash cars, but I do care about them being able to live without stress and continue to do the things they love and are best at.
As far as I'm concerned, the problem looks like this:
1. Society isn't providing them with a way to live, so it's down to me (and others like me) to help out.
Which leads to:
2. I'm not wealthy enough to feel like I can give back to them, or there's no reasonable interface to do so
Which leads to:
3. Out of desperation, they try to force my hand by employing advertising (so that indirectly there's a cashflow).
I'd rather work on #1 and #2 directly than look at #3. I'm not that interested in short term solutions, and advertising is a particularly ugly one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how it's done, but it happens. Forbes Shuts Down Ads Serving Malware http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/09/22/forbes...
I don't know how it's done either, and I've heard about them a few times. It seems somewhat unlikely that there is a remote code execution vulnerability being exploited only by adverts that hasn't been urgently fixed by the browsers. If there genuinely is an exploit, an advert blocker isn't enough as you could put it on any website as well. Therefore I wonder if it's possible that someone has a mis-informed definitio…
The threat is there and I'm not interested in taking the risk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty simple. The great content is created because the site can afford to pay for it. The "something else" I'm forcing you to look at is keeping the servers on. They HAVE figured out how to make it profitable, and you've figured out how to avoid paying for it. Just because you feel that the moral obligation is manufactured doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Paywalls are not the answer in all cases, and I do think t…
you are hurting a business by consuming content that costs them money to create and host without paying for it And if I chose not to consume their content, how much money would it save them?
Side note, I'd love to see ad blockers add something to block those cookie warnings. Since literally no one on either side wants them, I'm sure website authors would be willing to agree on a de facto standard css class or something that would make them real easy to hide. Maybe it should be opt-in in case someone tries to go after the ad blockers for interfering with the cookie law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's the difference: you seem to be getting something out of the ads. For me it's 100% irrelevant. If I need something I will go look for it. If what I need is so special that it can't be found by an internet search, rest assured no-one would make an ad for it. I am not sure why you use the term "cognitive dissonance" for referring to a situation where I consume without paying for something, and I don't feel entit…
It's pretty simple. The great content is created because the site can afford to pay for it. The "something else" I'm forcing you to look at is keeping the servers on. They HAVE figured out how to make it profitable, and you've figured out how to avoid paying for it. Just because you feel that the moral obligation is manufactured doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Paywalls are not the answer in all cases, and I do think t…
- The security implications of the large ad networks (how many malware scares were the result of exploit-laden ads being served on large, popular sites?)
- The privacy implications of same (tracking all the things)
- The large ad networks attitude towards said problems. ("Meh.")
The moment the sites that show these unvetted ads take some responsibility and agree to reimburse me and my company for my time spent dealing with a security breach caused by their shitty practices is the moment I begin considering not blocking ads at the firewall, and not a second before.
They want all the benefit with none of the responsibility. And that responsibility goes well beyond "paste some javascript we gave you in your header".
As long as the transaction is that one-sided, people will continue blocking, and no amount of moralizing is going to change it. Get used to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari at least added a disable all sound on a tab button. They should probably add or include video as an option too.
Yeah, Firefox has a mute tab button in each tab, but it still annoys me when all of a sudden I get some sound playing in the background for no reason.
Send me a picture of what you're selling, or don't sell me anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm under no such impression. Thanks for the image, though. I am under the impression that they are okay with or ambivalent towards tactics used by the ad-networks, because they'll block you for using an adblocker.
What's the reasonable alternative?
People question how we'll support content without ads, but I have to take a step back and wonder - is content that needs to be supported really that valuable? Might the world be a better place without it? People who are passionate about the subject they are writing on are going to publish regardless of ad revenue, assuming they get hits (writing stuff nobody reads is a fast track to burnout). Right now, in many cases…
No. You are basically saying that people should work for free if they are passionate about it. Professional writers cannot pay their bills with passion. Same with artists, musicians etc, and every other underpaid profession. Just because they (hopefully) like what they do, does not mean it is not work or does not have value.
Of course, there are rare cases of great artists/etc who can't make a living because they haven't been "discovered" yet, or because their work runs against the current trends (despite being brilliant). I would argue these are the minority, and for the most part the system is functioning properly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure there is. I have a creative skill to make information. If anyone in the world wants that information, they can pay me to make it, and then after that I've already been paid, I can release it CC0 and let the world go nuts with it. The problems of online DRM / ad ridden websites / etc are all attempts to after the fact monetize information using obsolete IP policy while acting like there is any scarcity to it at a…
Is the word for this relationship "patronage"?