Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The adblocking revolution is months away

theoverspill.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 355 posts

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#281

Post by s73v3r »

flavor8 wrote: post #254
hammerzeit wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget ethical questions, then, and let's talk economics. If you're not generating revenue for them, why should anybody who hopes to make money off of content choose to show you anything? What value do you represent to them? Why should they believe you?

I'll take "your broken business model is not my problem" for 200 points. There are plenty of places that I can buy content that I'm interested in. I'd far rather pay for quality content than put up with ads all over the web. As a plus side, paid for content might fix the journalism crisis. The death of content farms is not going to be a huge loss to the web ecosystem. Anything useful enough that people are willing to…

No, that's a fucking cop out. Answer the question: why do you feel entitled to view the content that others have worked to create for free? Why should we not expect the same of you? Why should we not expect you to work for free?

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#282

Post by s73v3r »

threeseed wrote: post #76
blinkingled wrote: post #36

How long will this revolution last if content providers decide to not show content to iOS users? I mean if they exist to make money and they can't on iOS would it matter that there were hundreds of millions of them? With ad blocking it would be as if they never existed in first place. Perhaps the idea is for Apple to get the content providers to make apps so they get their cut? Perhaps it is better for the content pr…

> How long will this revolution last if content providers decide to not show content to iOS users? Good luck with that. iOS users make up a significant percentage of web traffic and are demographically the most valuable (generally of a higher socio-economic status). By alienating them they won't be coming to your site which means no opportunity to upsell them to a paid version of the content. Advertisers don't deserv…

" iOS users make up a significant percentage of web traffic and are demographically the most valuable (generally of a higher socio-economic status)."

What good is that if they're blocking ads, so you can't monetize them?

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#283

Post by s73v3r »

kinghajj wrote: post #250
hsod wrote: post #244

A thought experiment for the "there's nothing wrong with AdBlock" set: Imagine a blog with quality original content that is relevant to your interests. Imagine that, the first time you go to that site, you see the following text: "This site and it's content are supported by advertisement. If you would like to read our content the only thing we ask is that you do not use an ad blocker on our pages. If this arrangement…

> Would you still block ads on the site? Yes. Even the "non-obtrusive" ones. My computer, my browser, choice; I'm under no obligation to interpret their content as they intended.

And you would still visit their site?

So basically you're an ass.

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#284

Post by hsod »

mirimir wrote: post #273
hsod wrote: post #244

A thought experiment for the "there's nothing wrong with AdBlock" set: Imagine a blog with quality original content that is relevant to your interests. Imagine that, the first time you go to that site, you see the following text: "This site and it's content are supported by advertisement. If you would like to read our content the only thing we ask is that you do not use an ad blocker on our pages. If this arrangement…

Yes. Unless the site owner agreed to accept all liability for malware potentially dropped by ads. They would need funds in escrow, and a claims mechanism.

Why not just stop going to the site?

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#285

Post by s73v3r »

unprepare wrote: post #214
kuni-toko-tachi wrote: post #84

"People are getting p*ssed off with the huge data loads pages impose without their consent" This is an absurd statement. Users know that many sites are ad-supported. Whether they like it or not is independent of that, but consent is given by visiting them. Complaining that sites need ad revenue to support their operations is childish. The fair solution is not ad-blocking tools, but a general browser settings that say…

>Doing an end-run around ads is no different that sneaking into the backdoor of a venue without buying a ticket. This is a curious statement. Tickets are sold in limited quantities Venues have limited available space Those alone make the comparison completely moot. A better comparison would be: If I video tape (download) a tv show (website), and then watch it by fast-forwarding through commercials (ad-blocking) - hav…

No, the concert analogy is valid. It still costs the website bandwidth and server time to serve the website to you.

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#286

Post by s73v3r »

someuser1 wrote: post #239
unprepare wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Doing an end-run around ads is no different that sneaking into the backdoor of a venue without buying a ticket. This is a curious statement. Tickets are sold in limited quantities Venues have limited available space Those alone make the comparison completely moot. A better comparison would be: If I video tape (download) a tv show (website), and then watch it by fast-forwarding through commercials (ad-blocking) - hav…

Going back to a statement I made in another comment: I DON'T WANT YOUR SHIT. My argument is that ads are a waste of your bandwidth and my time. I've literally never been motivated to buy something by a banner ad.

So don't visit their website. Problem solved.

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#287

Post by thatswrong0 »

s73v3r wrote: post #279
joesmo wrote: post #181

"But wait, what about the moral dimension? The fact that if you block the ads, the sites lose their income?" What a ridiculous point. Sure the advertisers want to make this into a moral issue, but is it? No. It's not. Advertisers just feel entitled. They are not actually entitled to display their ads or make money. Even bringing up this point like it's a valid point for debate drags the quality of the article down. A…

Apparently just like you feel entitled to enjoy the content others have made for free.

When a webpage is served to you, you are under no obligation to not modify that webpage in any way. They gave the bytes to you for free. You can do whatever you want to them once you get them.

If my modification of that content is depriving them of income, then that's a flaw in their business model, not my ethics.

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#288

Post by s73v3r »

gorena wrote: post #133
kuni-toko-tachi wrote: post #84

"People are getting p*ssed off with the huge data loads pages impose without their consent" This is an absurd statement. Users know that many sites are ad-supported. Whether they like it or not is independent of that, but consent is given by visiting them. Complaining that sites need ad revenue to support their operations is childish. The fair solution is not ad-blocking tools, but a general browser settings that say…

Consent? I send an HTTP request. Server sends an HTTP response. My browser (or not browser - is cURL violating "consent"?) interprets that as I wish. If you don't want to show me content, return a 3XX/4XX/5XX.

And then you'd cry and moan that the big bad website is forcing you to view ads.

Re: The adblocking revolution is months away

#290

Post by shkkmo »

I don't see why this article mentions all those add blockers, discuses the moral implications, and then completely fails to mention Privacy Badger.

https://www.eff.org/privacybadger

> Because Privacy Badger is primarily a privacy tool, not an ad blocker. Our aim is not to block ads, but to prevent non-consensual invasions of people's privacy because we believe they are inherently objectionable. We also want to create incentives for advertising companies to do the right thing. Of course, if you really dislike ads, you can also install a traditional ad blocker.

If more people used this type of plugin, it would provide incentive for advertisers and advertising to behave better while still allowing for the existence of add-supported business models.

I don't even see any mentions of that plugin in the comments on this page? Are people not aware of it? Do they not like it?

I do find that it isn't perfect. Some of the scripts that is blocks are sometimes required for website funcitonality. When page is broken I sometimes have to check and modify the rules for that page. This isn't ideal for normal users, but should be acceptable by people with sufficient technical ability (such as users of this site). As more people use it, I am sure this feedback will improve the rulesets that privacy badger uses.

Post reply on HN