More than 10% of telemetry-enabled Firefox users worldwide use adblockers. In Poland it's 15%. In the United States, Germany, and Russia it is closer to 20%, and in France it is closer to 30% [1]. [1]: https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/usage-behavior (see near the bottom of the page)
But Firefox is under 5% of browser market share (generous estimates still seem to put it under 5%—the low-side estimate is closer to 2.5%) and its users are almost-certainly far more likely than most to use ad blockers.
But why are you working on a project? If it isn't for the money then you are doing it to 'give back to the community'. But if they are turning hostile to you then why continue?
Because you want to see that sort of project exist and if no one else is doing it, why not yourself? That's why I work on (certain) projects anyway, not for any community support or for money.
> "Because you want to see that sort of project exist and if no one else is doing it, why not yourself?"
That right there was my understanding of how most open source projects come into existence. Building a thing because it's a thing you want, and it don't yet exist in the form you're seeking, so ... "I'll just make it myself!" Then you throw it out into the world, because "Hey, why not?"
Holy moley the ads. This latest campaign finally convinced me to turn off the adblockers on youtube and goodness Foxnews emergency rations and buygold are the ads utter contemptable garbage. Obvious scams, get rich quick schemes, Trump political ads....please for all that is holy get that shit off of my screen.
I'd even be willing to watch a blank screen for the length of the ads if I didn't have to see this trash.
Another true entitlement is adblock users complaining that YouTube is greedy , etcetera, now that they're actually kicking said users off their site. You (in the general sense) are certainly not responsible for making YouTube's business work, but by a similar token they are certainly not under any obligation to continue serving data to users who don't generate any revenue.
> by a similar token they are certainly not under any obligation to continue serving data to users who don't generate any revenue Sure. Let's see them return HTTP 402 Payment Required instead of a free video stream then. I'm actually okay with that. Somehow I doubt they'll ever do that. They want that mass market appeal, don't they? I know it. You know it. Everyone knows it. Just like the "free" apps who do anything…
I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. By all accounts, YouTube is implementing countermeasures that block adblock users from watching videos on their site. What is functionally different between that and returning a 402, especially since you can in fact pay for ad-free YouTube?
Reddit shouldn't be considered as a tech support site. As most of the drama happens there. GitHub issues might have less drama as compared to that. Just avoid reddit at all costs for your peace of mind.
> YouTube is the one that feels "Entitled" to show me advertisements They show you advertisements in exchange for the free content they provide. You can just as easily not visit the website if you don't feel like the service they provide is worth the risk of being shown the ads they serve.
This is false logic. Youtube is free to not show anyone anything - once they send me data and it leaves their system, they have no claim to it. When I shout on a public street "sing me the Francoise Hardy version of I'll Be Seeing You," no one has to reply. If they do reply, but they decide to sing a 2 minute ad for a pyramid scheme first, I am free to cover my ears till the song comes on. Google's servers have a pub…
> Youtube is free to not show anyone anything - once they send me data and it leaves their system, they have no claim to it.
Okay well they're about to not show you the videos. You support their latest announcement right? It is completely in line with the the philosophy you just put forward.
Especially considering that YouTube gets the content for almost free
> YouTube gets the content for almost free Google pays out about 50% of ad revenue to content creators, that isn't "almost free" that is many billions of dollars.
Yeah but what percentage of subscription costs go to paying creators?
Apart from the Youtube stuff, the post also highlights something else, entitlement towards free services like uBlock origin. > It’s one thing to play cat and mouse with YouTube. It’s quite another to deal with a wave of angry users. > And then one of the moderators actually deleted their Reddit account. “The ID in the post wasn’t updated because my mother was hospitalized,” they said. It’s sad to see them leave becau…
I hope the people developing uBlock Origin and all the filter lists are alright. They're my heroes. No one deserves this treatment, least of all them. I like to take a moment to publicly thank them whenever the opportunity to do so arises. Thank you so much!
Every single time I meet one of the developers of an open source project that has benefited me in some way, I always make it a point to tell them "Thank you" and let them know how (and how much) their generosity benefited me, and how much I really appreciate it. I also make efforts to help out in any ways I'm able. Sometimes that's cash (when I've got some available to spare), and sometimes it's just helping out in support channels, or bugreports / pull requests, etc.
However well trained they may be, humans are notoriously easy to manipulate and engineer around. Humans in a customer service role especially, since they are by definition expected to be helpful by default.
We've reached maximum reply depth. > This is not a hypothetical. In many healthcare systems, that is the approximate timeframe for medical practice, doctors are amongst the most expensive and selectively educated service professionals on the planet, and can still be readily hoodwinked by a bad faith approach. Yes, because they are trained, licensed, and incentivized to place other things above fraud detection or cust…
But Firefox is under 5% of browser market share (generous estimates still seem to put it under 5%—the low-side estimate is closer to 2.5%) and its users are almost-certainly far more likely than most to use ad blockers.
You're arguing against a straw man.
I don’t follow.
“Not a lot of people use ad blockers”
“quite a few telemetry enabled Firefox users do”
“but Firefox users are a tiny share of total users and probably way more likely to ad block than most web users”