51–60 of 263 posts
The motto of Pale Moon is "Your browser, Your way". But apparently not very so... The current ad system is broken and, although I understand Google decision to protect its own profits, I don't see why an open source project that aims to provide an unbiased browsing experience would follow suit.
How is "modify about:config" not having it "your way"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's distinctly passive with ad blockers. Sure, you want to read my content without supporting me (some publications prevent you from doing so, but mine does not). You're just affecting you. With AdNauseum, you are actively attacking our ability to make money off of other users. You're punishing me for writing content that you want to read.
I am also attacking your ability to track and infect other users with malware, so I am doing a good thing. And no, I am not punishing you - I am punishing a shitty industry for wasting millions of hours of time globally and causing damage with malware. We've seen that pacific methods do not work so the only way to drive change is to actively fight back until the lowlife either adapts (by becoming better) or dies.
Also what ads cause damage? Like sure the ads on porn or piratebay are cancerous but no reputable newspaper will have anything harmful, just potentially annoying.
That AdNauseam causes potential damage to people running ads and generating revenue from ads by devaluing clicks is a feature, not a bug. My understanding of the plugin is that it views advertising as universally bad, and that if a site cannot survive without ads, it must not be worth much at all, and deserves to die. I wholeheartedly agree with this view.
Why? I work at a newspaper, we've survived on ads for decades, the way we deliver them has just changed. Most newspapers are like this, are you saying we should not exist?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're hurting the publishers. I'm a software developer at a local newspaper. We've been dealing with floods of fake ad clicks for about a year now, and they severely hurt our bottom line. We don't even use an ad network a la google, we sell our own ads to local businesses and such. You're not sticking it to the man, you're punishing me and my colleagues and friends for writing content that you wanted to read. You're…
On the one hand, I agree with your sentiment in general. However, it's a double edged sword here. LOTS of people are so sick of advertising networks, tracking, privacy invasion and malware from compromised ad networks that the underlying issue, the idea that click and impression based advertising is fundamentally flawed, is something that people are going to continue to protest. If the system is so broken that it's s…
You are right that we need to figure out how to evolve advertising--which is never going away--to a better place, but reactionary destruction does not seem like fertile ground for "y'know, ads kind of suck, how do we make this work better for everyone?".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's distinctly passive with ad blockers. Sure, you want to read my content without supporting me (some publications prevent you from doing so, but mine does not). You're just affecting you. With AdNauseum, you are actively attacking our ability to make money off of other users. You're punishing me for writing content that you want to read.
I am also attacking your ability to track and infect other users with malware, so I am doing a good thing. And no, I am not punishing you - I am punishing a shitty industry for wasting millions of hours of time globally and causing damage with malware. We've seen that pacific methods do not work so the only way to drive change is to actively fight back until the lowlife either adapts (by becoming better) or dies.
> We don't even use an ad network a la google, we sell our own ads to local businesses and such.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So Google, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat have no value? Because those aren't just little sites, but entire companies that have value solely because of ads. Take away ads and they don't exist.
>So Google, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat have no value? No, not value-less, but I didn't agree to pay for their services with the total loss of my privacy on-line. (and one doesn't have to use any of those services in order to be spied upon by them)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The recent push for AdNauseam seems to be from the 4chan, free speech crowd, as a reaction to Google efforts aimed at stifling politically incorrect speech on its platforms. See https://ageofshitlords.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/4chan-...
Slightly off topic, but I find the implication made in the image you linked that Google, a company which profits via wage labour, which owns property, is a "Communist" organisation to be absolutely hilarious if it wasn't a sincerely held view by some poor souls.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am also attacking your ability to track and infect other users with malware, so I am doing a good thing. And no, I am not punishing you - I am punishing a shitty industry for wasting millions of hours of time globally and causing damage with malware. We've seen that pacific methods do not work so the only way to drive change is to actively fight back until the lowlife either adapts (by becoming better) or dies.
I can't speak to the general case here, but after reading Chuck's other comment, I think you may be mistaken about his website specifically: > We don't even use an ad network a la google, we sell our own ads to local businesses and such. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15112764
If he does get on one of those lists it's quite easy to change the markup of the page (class names, etc) to stop the rules from matching. If you're doing the right thing by hosting your own ads you fully control the markup and layout and it becomes extremely easy to protect yourself from this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is "modify about:config" not having it "your way"?
Might as well use Firefox then, you can always modify the source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why can't you sustain your business from subscription fees?
It just doesn't work. Most of our readers don't pay for news, and if they did, they'd probably pay for larger national papers. Back in the day of paper newspapers, our subscription fees had to be augmented with ad revenue as well.
The same phenomenon is occurring with car dealerships facing Tesla.