21–30 of 334 posts
If the ad is coming from their own server and displayed with their own custom HTML/CSS, I can't see an obvious way these could be detected and blocked in general.
That is:
* Security risk through ads (malvertising, ad networks not supporting https etc.).
* Ads killing performance (70% CPU for a flash ad is not uncommon).
* Privacy (Ad vendors having mostly stated that they won't accept user wishes through DNT or similar technologies).
Privacy is a tricky one, because data is in part where the income comes from. But the other two are fixable. I want to hear from everyone complaining about ad blockers what they intend to do to make ads less of a security risk and cpu cycle burner. That would be a good start of a proper conversation about the topic. Every text that ignores these issues is usually not worth recognizing.
Patreon (and youtube community in general) have, together with projects like gog.com, humblebundle etc. proved that people actually WANT to pay for content even if they don't have to. But only in the way they want to. Especially if that means they'll get more reader centric content, not advertiser centric.
There's no such thing as a free lunch. Ad-supported media is not free, it's costs are simply externalised. While we, the tech-savvy, may not click ads, somebody is buying those payday loans, lose 30 lbs in a month with this weird trick, get-rich-quick scams.
I'm more than happy to see ad-financed (mostly low-quality) content go the way of the popup. I have no problem paying for quality content (Netflix, Hulu Plus, Audible, etc.). The few high quality ad-supported blogs will then be able to charge for their content, since there will be no decent alternatives. As long as ad-supported content exists though, it will be a race to the bottom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Me too. And there is no point to access the last two years of someone's browsing history to know that someone visiting a video game website is interested in video games or technology.
But what kinds of science and technology? Maybe our user has a bit of disposable income and wouldn't mind ads for high-end hardware he didn't happen to know about. Maybe she's interested in DLC for games she's passionate about, as measured for frequently of forum visits. Maybe our user runs a lab and would be very interested in high-end PCR machines. You can do much better than "interested in video games or technolog…
Don't care. Nothing shall be changed. You're on your own, guru3d.
or you know, change your business model to suit your market.
If your content adds value to your visitors' lives, then charge for it. If the only revenue stream you can rely on is ads, then probably there is a problem with the stuff you offer not being valuable enough to people.
I don't want this to sound grumpy, and I don't mean to say your content is not good or valuable. It's just that I've discussed this topic a lot of times with friends and colleagues and there seems to be a common agreement that ads and trackers have become so invasive (visually and privacy-wise) that people are not wanting to see them anymore or to be tracked.
As always, it's about survival of the fittest and those who know how to adapt quickest. Find a way to charge for your content and build a sustainable business.
Well now how costly? Just one dedicated server? multiple? Usage of AWS? Distributed data centres?
Staff? accountants, designers, moderators? Or automated scripts and volunteers?
If an organisation appeals to me to support them, I will, if they outline where and why they need it. Like Wikipedia for example or like OpenStreetMap. To say "oh it costs too much and we have lots of hits" is not an appeal to rationality.