no, don't be parasite
Who exactly is feeding off of who in this relationship?
Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
61–70 of 102 posts
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#62I don't use ad-blocker - instead I have disabled js on all-sites by default, and have enabled click-to-run-plugin setting (I use chromium).
Thanks to this settings, I don't see ads and don't support shit sites with static content hidden behind js-wall - like blogspot or google groups.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#63I wonder why this got knocked off the homepage? It was becoming a very interesting discussion with some fascinating poll figures. Sometimes I wish a "flag" had to come with a reason why... Bummer.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#64Ad blockers are easily fingerprintable, which is why I block ad trackers from my /etc/hosts file, using this wonderful list: http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ You can also set up a cron job to periodically fetch and overwrite with an updated copy, such as once a week or so.
It also redirects your standard lemon-goatse-party.org type sites.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#65I don't use an ad blocker for ethical reasons, but I'm curious what sites everyone visits so often that have such devastating ads? Safari shows my top sites as Hulu, MacRumors, Hacker News, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Gmail, GitHub, Amazon, Stack Overflow, Chess.com, and Wikipedia. Ads don't bother me much on any of these.
I've used an adblocker on desktop for at least a decade, so I don't know what ads are like on desktop these days. But mobile is a different ballgame. I didn't use an adblocker for a couple years, and just put up with the wasted bandwidth and scrolling annoyance. But then the ads started talking, usually on how-to articles and the like. And the ads on a forum I visit began redirecting to porn sites and app stores. I p…
You hurt the one that aren't abusive and give them reason to become abusive to survive... that's sad because we can get so much great content for free that way. Now they will need to change business model and have ads even more intrusive that can't be blocked, paid article and pay wall.
If a website annoy me, I just find another one.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#66In addition to several of the add-ons mentioned elsewhere in this thread (RequestPolicy, Ghostery), I use the helpful-only-for-Facebook FBPurity add-on which has had some issues staying in the various 'blessed' add-on repositories because it accomplishes its intended purpose so well!
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#67no, don't be parasite
You seem to have it backwards. The ecosystem's parasites are the parties that corrupt useful information with distracting crap. Everyone who cares about the health of the web should run adblockers and install them for friends/family.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#68I used to, but then I thought about some of the sites I use with great regularity that are supported by unobtrusive ads, a few of which are interesting to me. I'd hate to reduce their income and contribute to their eventual disappearance; it's worth a few ads to have them stick around. Sites with obtrusive, annoying ads? Well, I suppose I still use Facebook, but usually they help me avoid content-weak, ad-heavy trash…
Do sites get money when they show ads but nobody clicks on them? Or are most ads today only paid if a user clicks on them? Also, do you feel compelled to watch ads on TV when you have the option of fast-forwarding through them? If not, why is the web different? Just curious - I'm seriously not trying to be inflammatory.
I know you can pay for ads through views or clicks. I don't know how most are paid but you can certainly get both.
Does it actually does anything to fast forward an ads on TV? Is there a counter that doesn't increment when that happens? I guess indirectly they will consider that possibility when they pay for TV ads but that's a whole other story and it can't be compared. On a website you directly affect their revenue by not showing the ads.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#69I would vote for a third option along the lines of "I allow ads but block flash or don't have it installed." I used to have an adblocker installed, but switched to blocking Flash as soon as I discovered the ability for Chrome to disable flash components until I click on them. This lets the good sites with unobtrusive ads still get their impressions and hides all of the really bad things like ads with video or sound.…
This is definitely the best of both worlds. I want to support sites I visit, even obnoxious ones, but sites don't get to play sound/video without my permission. Flash is crap anyway, so it has the added benefit of smoothing out browsing somewhat.
Re: Poll: Do you use an ad-blocker?
#70Ad blockers are easily fingerprintable, which is why I block ad trackers from my /etc/hosts file, using this wonderful list: http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ You can also set up a cron job to periodically fetch and overwrite with an updated copy, such as once a week or so.
I always see this recommendation and write it off as people who probably don't know any better. But I noticed that you had also commented about Slackware, so I have to ask..
Doesn't using /etc/hosts in this way strike you as a bit "wrong" and terribly hacky with respect to blocking granularity? If I ever wanted to run a service on port 80, it seems like it would be annoying to configure it to avoid the dummy address. And I use /etc/hosts for my actual hosts, and while these uses aren't exclusive, it does set the tone for me.
I personally run Adblock Plus and Ghostery in Iceweasel because it's the easiest way. There are certainly disadvantages to this, but it seems the proper setup would be to run something like privoxy, no?