At first I thought this was a great idea, but then I thought about it more. I think this is the digital equivalent of an angry mob throwing bricks through windows. We aren't doing any good, just destroying the community we live in. What would it be like if all the content creators that are incentivized by ad revenue lost their revenue? And we lost their content? I don't like being placed into an artificial bubble of customized content by tracking services, but i don't think this is the solution.
AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
181–190 of 282 posts
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding #3, I'm personally 100% against any online advertising in any form. So this punishes those who support it. Ditto for #2. As for #1, I'm not gaining anything, and no one is being deprived for their rights. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there? If anything prosecutors should start with the rampant fraud being committed by companies in the online advertising space before they even think about lo…
Micropayments have never worked well on the internet, not for technical problems, but likely more that the market isn't really there. I know I just want free stuff and I'm not going to pay to read a news article or blog post no matter how well written or researched. So at the end of the day there is still no viable alternative to advertising supported content. Kill advertising and you'll take the content with it, bec…
[deleted]
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#183Good. I'm done being nice to advertisers. They are actively poisoning the internet in more ways than one. They had their chance to work out better ways to advertise, and they instead redoubled assaults on attention. This is getting installed on all of my browsers on all of my PCs. If your startup is advertising based, find a different model, or do without my business. I have no obligation to help you fund yourself or…
What I'd really like is something that uses stylometry to track astroturfer comments, shills, fake news authors, advertisements parading as news, and PR campaigns, etc. Then just have those articles identified on places like Hacker News, Reddit, etc. Optional to block them if you want. Keep a list of identified writers/writer 'styles' that are penned by fraudsters. Like easy-list is for ads. That'd be the only way to…
The problem is the subjectivity of half the items on your list.
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's my bandwidth, my browser. I'll automate clicking any goddamn thing I like. Don't like it? Don't serve it.
Ugh, we've had this argument so many times.. By your logic, the website operator can also say "it's my website, I'll serve the ads I want the way I want .. don't like it? don't visit my site" And yet, there you are anyways, with your ad blocker.. hard to take the high ground I think..
> I'll serve the ads I want the way I want.
Indeed they should. In most cases, they still send the page when requested. The problems start when authors decide they don't just want to control what they serve at their website. The advertising model also requires control of the client to guarantee that the ads are shown.
That kind of control is possible with a contract (e.g. a paywall or similar controlled access). Instead, a lot of "content creators" want to have the benefits of a contract but only from one side.
> And yet, there you are anyways, with your ad blocker
So stop sending them data when they ask for it. In the meantime, ad blockers are going to show exactly how little some "content" was actually worth. If your content is worth so little that nobody is willing to pay for it in money or time, don't be surprised when attempts to force payment (in time or attention) results in blowback.
> hard to take the high ground I think
It isn't unethical to use as desired data that you were freely given. The only people that are ceding ethical high ground are "content creators" that want to control how people use their website. Delusional beliefs about what they think contract law ought to be is no substitute for a business model that understands what the internet actually is.
--
TL;DR - We aren't ethically obligated to prop up your business plan that relies on artificial scarcity. If you don't want people to read your web pages, stop sending those pages without pre-{payment,authorization}. I suggest finding a better business plan.
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#185I approach this differently. There are a few use cases I go to the web for. For each use case that is not a free browsing I create an electron app, that never executes any code from the web or uses any external style. It only uses XHR to fetch html pages/json data/other static stuff and then transforms that data and uses it in the custom UI designed for the use case. For example one use case is collection of news. My…
This is brilliant. Can you point us to a repo with MVP to build on?
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I pass a street musician, I haven't implicitly signed a contract to pay her for the show -- either in currency or by transferring any other valued commodity. I don't have an obligation to support her business plan, even if I enjoy the music. She may perhaps claim that we entered into an implied contract. Or the musician could post a placard reading her terms-of-service. But in simply walking down the street, like…
Correct you took no action to interface with them besides walking. But if you walk into a room where just a musician is playing(and its advertised that this is whats happening in the room) you have now created a relationship where you've chosen to receive their art. And if they have a poster for their sponsor on the wall behind them you can't complain about it.
But nobody told me what was happening in the room before I walked into it. I saw nothing but a URL, or maybe I saw some text obliquely indicating what might be happening in there. I certainly didn't see the text of a contract before I walked in. If I walk in, not knowing anything, how can I have signed a contract?
Similarly, if I have no binding contract, it certainly can't be required of me to observe or respond to everything within the room. There is no origin for the musician's claimed right to oblige me to any commercial action.
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#187I approach this differently. There are a few use cases I go to the web for. For each use case that is not a free browsing I create an electron app, that never executes any code from the web or uses any external style. It only uses XHR to fetch html pages/json data/other static stuff and then transforms that data and uses it in the custom UI designed for the use case. For example one use case is collection of news. My…
Wow. Definitely publish the source. Someone will either immediately rewrite it or plugin-ify it, I bet. Either way, you get lots of free labor to work for you.
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#188I approach this differently. There are a few use cases I go to the web for. For each use case that is not a free browsing I create an electron app, that never executes any code from the web or uses any external style. It only uses XHR to fetch html pages/json data/other static stuff and then transforms that data and uses it in the custom UI designed for the use case. For example one use case is collection of news. My…
Package & sell.
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like the ads just appear while you're sitting around doing nothing. You see the ads when you are receiving something with them. The ad companies are paying for your attention with the content you consume.
My attention is more valuable than that. It's /my/ attention, I get to set the price, and I don't accept their offer. They're welcome to block me from their websites, if they feel that's not acceptable.
No it's not. Your attention isn't worth much tbh. But like the other poster said, pay me for reading your post.
Re: AdNauseam: Fight Back Against Advertising Networks and Privacy Abuse
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ergo, tracking is perfectly legal and moral. It is currently legal, but that doesn't imply that it's moral. Legality does not define morality. > Nowhere in the HTTP protocol does it say not to send viruses. Correct. > Totally ethical and legal. Sending a virus is patently unethical regardless of the transport mechanism. as for legality, see a lawyer about 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5). https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/t…
I was just responding to OP's claim that since the protocol doesn't specify that I'll be watching ads, it must be legal and ethical to block them and harass those who spend money on them.
> I was just responding to OP's claim that since the protocol doesn't specify
I know. The examples were still factually incorrect straw-men.
> it must be legal and ethical to block them
That's the point; it is legal and ethical to use data that was voluntarily given. If you want control over how things are used, stop sending to everybody freely and require a contract.
> harass those who spend money on them.
Clicking a link isn't harassment.