I block all advertisement, and go out of my way to ignore it and scroll right past it.
You really just closed that overton window didn't you
Tongue in cheek joke went over most people's heads
Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
121–130 of 154 posts
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#122It's OK to block ads because it's my computer and I get to decide what it will and won't do. Period.
That said, I don't block ads. I block trackers and JS, which happens to have the side-effect of blocking almost all ads. If ads appear that don't track me or use JS, I will totally see them. I won't even mind too much.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The quid pro quo of the site is you pay nothing to see this, but you look at the ads that pay for the site. But this isn't the fucking model. The model is: We created compelling content that draws lots of views, and companies will pay us to plaster their name/products on it. There is literally zero contract with the person being shown the ads at all. They can do as they please. If companies don't like that... move…
> move to a different model - stop showing your stuff for free. what if that model was a contract to the viewer, wherein the viewer agrees to see all adverts? Currently this contract is assumed, or implied, but not enforced. What if it changes in the future? For example, youtube could require that you have a webcam, and run a trusted-computing-module DRM code which forces your webcam to be on and recording your face…
> Currently this contract is assumed, or implied
No, it's not. Except perhaps by ad companies, but one side assuming a contract does not a contract make.
> youtube could require that you have a webcam, and run a trusted-computing-module DRM code which forces your webcam to be on and recording your face to view their videos?
Then I wouldn't watch YouTube anymore -- that's far too much to pay for something like YouTube.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure if this adds anything. I know there's no contract. But while the system can shoulder a certain load of parasitic behaviour, if everyone does as you say then it stops working. So practically speaking it is a quid quo pro. A better analogue for your description is something like the Guardian website, where you don't have to pay for it, but it does require a certain number of people to volunteer to subscrib…
I know there is a lot of push back against pay walls but I would rather give money to a business that I know than to have some creepy unknown entity record everything I do.
I used to feel that way, then I learned that paying (or even just signing up "for free") doesn't get you out of the spying they engage in. In fact, it makes the spying easier to do and more comprehensive.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh to HELL with that garbage. I don't get paid for 99.9% of the ads that infest my daily life. I get no say in it at all. There is no off switch. There is no block. There is no avoiding it. The logos are everywhere. The posters. The visual and audible noise. Advertising has infested my childhood memories FFS. I can recite more goddamn jingles from when I was under 10 than I can remember my friends and classmates name…
> The idea that it is unethical to block when having punches thrown at you as we are is just so incredibly ridiculous it's hard to see it other than facebrick google paid propaganda that you've taken to heart somehow. As I say, it doesn't need to be ethical. On your comment: of course, no one is throwing punches at you. It's just advertising. You don't have to go to the website that has it on.
Advertising is throwing punches at you. Worse, advertising stalks you to throw punches at you.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you're accessing content paid for by adverts, but you aren't contributing to that payment. If the content is paid for by adverts, then of course I am not contributing to that payment. Because I am not an advertising company, so by your own logic I didn't pay for the content. What's the problem?
You are paying for it. Just not directly. You’re paying the advertiser with your attention, who then pays the website for the privilege to do so. Whether you think that’s OK or not is a different issue, but you are paying, even if you’re not the customer. Just because you don’t directly pay for something doesn’t mean you don’t do so indirectly. For example, Facebook makes almost all their revenue from ads, but advert…
Which is exactly why I take great issue with calling ad-supported websites (or anything) "free". They're not free at all. They're very expensive.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#127If enough of us used ad blockers, it could help force a systemic shift away from the attention economy altogether It's worth putting serious thought into whether this would actually be a better web; I think it would likely be worse. Most sites today are supported by ads, and if that weren't an option we'd see some combination of paywalls, sponsored content, and sites shutting down. (I used to work on ads)
> It's worth putting serious thought into whether this would actually be a better web; I think it would likely be worse. Most sites today are supported by ads
I think it would be better. Most ad-supported sites today are pretty much garbage, in large part because they're ad-supported.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#128The most basic argument for online ad blocking is that I should be in control of my own equipment. It's my phone, my computer, an internet connection I pay for. Why shouldn't I do whatever I want with it. Websites should consider themselves lucky I let them run their stupid inefficient scripts on my machine.
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#129If enough of us used ad blockers, it could help force a systemic shift away from the attention economy altogether It's worth putting serious thought into whether this would actually be a better web; I think it would likely be worse. Most sites today are supported by ads, and if that weren't an option we'd see some combination of paywalls, sponsored content, and sites shutting down. (I used to work on ads)
> It's worth putting serious thought into whether this would actually be a better web; I think it would likely be worse. Most sites today are supported by ads I think it would be better. Most ad-supported sites today are pretty much garbage, in large part because they're ad-supported.
> Most ad-supported sites today are pretty much garbage, in large part because they're ad-supported.
Would you include HN there? ;)
Re: Why It’s OK to Block Ads (2015)
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Century of the Self is a great introduction to this. Modern advertising literally uses techniques originally developed for wartime (WWII) propaganda. Commercial advertising is literally brainwashing applied for economic purposes rather than political (though often both, too). p.s. if you like the Century of the Self, watch Hypernormalization as well. Amazing documentaries.
Actually WWI. The clue is in the name of the doc.
Thanks for the correction, it's been a while (too long) since I've seen it!