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

No adblocker detected

maurycyz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 388 posts

Re: No adblocker detected

#221

Post by freehorse »

nobody9999 wrote: post #188
randunel wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The websites you speak of don't get to decide what my hardware and my software does when running in my hands. Their content is a suggestion for my user agent, not some unbreakable law. If they don't like it, they should shut down completely.

>Their content is a suggestion for my user agent, not some unbreakable law. If they don't like it, they should shut down completely. Alternatively, they can also refuse to serve you their content unless you turn off your ad blocker. Which would be fine. It is their content they're hosting after all. And it's also fine for you to decide not to turn off your ad blocker and not view their content.

There are some that do this and I also think it is fair. I just close the website and do not view the content. Nobody is forced to either serve or be served so I do not see what is the problem to be discussed here.

I wonder why not many websites do this """adblocking freeloaders""" is such a big issue?

Re: No adblocker detected

#222

Post by Theodores »

Vinnl wrote: post #194
bambax wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the same boat. I never see ads anywhere (and not just on the web: I never watch regular TV (I don't even have a TV), never listen to ads-supported radio stations, etc.) How people put up with ads is a complete mystery.

> I never see ads anywhere (and not just on the web: I never watch regular TV (I don't even have a TV), never listen to ads-supported radio stations, etc.) Ads in public places, bus stops, etc. are kinda hard to avoid unfortunately.

Get a bicycle and learn the car free routes into town and to your work. Nobody puts up adverts on cycle paths. It isn't against the law, it just makes no commercial sense to do so.

By making the bicycle however you get about, you cut down on seeing ads.

Re: No adblocker detected

#223

Post by freehorse »

toastercat wrote: post #41

I'm torn. I'm not a huge fan of ads and I don't have a lot of respect for the modern ad networks. However this culture of expecting websites to host the data then freeloading off it by blocking the tracking and ads is also a bit ugly. There is an unwritten social contract here. Websites are willing to host and organise a vast number of content because that'll attract an audience for ads. If there are too may freeload…

I don't consider myself/users responsible for solving the broken business model of a big part of the modern web. The problem of ads is not just "I do not like ads", which is also a valid reason imo concerning how intrusive and distracting they are blinking and yelling around and making everything slower, but a matter of privacy and safety. There is no social contract that accepts this. Moreover, I have no way to actually know or consent to be served ads before actually loading them, so I have to use an adblocker just in case. I would not mind if a website detects my adblocker and not serving me the content either. So in this sense, imo if a website decides to serve me the content without ads it is up to them, not me.

I would care much less if tracking/personalisation was not part of the ad systems and we were just shown ads based on the content of a webpage. Actually, I am ok with stuff like sponsor segments from content creators, sponsored articles etc. There are ways to serve ads without invading privacy or making it disturbing, but modern advertising industry has chosen a different path.

There are also alternative models, subscriptions, actually buying and *owning* the content (how outdated! let's have ads instead), donations, having a "pro" version with extra optional features etc. There is important stuff in the internet (eg wikipedia) that works fine without ads at all. But if you want to scale to a billion $$$ business maybe it makes sense to rely more on ads, but I do not find this compelling as an argument for users to suffer ads or part of any social contract.

Re: No adblocker detected

#224

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

rs186 wrote: post #209
ksynwa wrote: post #36

I am extremely insulated from ads online and have been for about a decade. Once in a while I have to browse on a device that does not have an ad blocker or most of the times does not even let you install one. Seeing a website that is SEoptimised and heavily ad supported feels like walking into a crack den. That this is the normal experience for the vast majority of users is sad.

I have DNS based adblocking on home router, plus adblock extension. Every time I use the web using 5G data or public wifi, I regret the experience. Then I immediately turn on an adblocking VPN.

Mullvad has a free DoH service, FYI. It can potentially replace your self-hosted service, at least for your phone, so you don't forget to set it up when you leave home.

https://mullvad.net/en/help/dns-over-https-and-dns-over-tls

Re: No adblocker detected

#225

Post by rkomorn »

freehorse wrote: post #223
toastercat wrote: post #41

I'm torn. I'm not a huge fan of ads and I don't have a lot of respect for the modern ad networks. However this culture of expecting websites to host the data then freeloading off it by blocking the tracking and ads is also a bit ugly. There is an unwritten social contract here. Websites are willing to host and organise a vast number of content because that'll attract an audience for ads. If there are too may freeload…

I don't consider myself/users responsible for solving the broken business model of a big part of the modern web. The problem of ads is not just "I do not like ads", which is also a valid reason imo concerning how intrusive and distracting they are blinking and yelling around and making everything slower, but a matter of privacy and safety. There is no social contract that accepts this. Moreover, I have no way to actu…

> I would not mind if a website detects my adblocker and not serving me the content either.

How do you feel about ad blockers continually trying to evade detection, though?

Or guides about how to avoid things that block access to users of ad blockers?

I think the "you're free to block me for using an ad blocker!" argument doesn't mean much when said ad blockers do their best to not let that happen in the first place.

Re: No adblocker detected

#226

Post by jollyllama »

ksynwa wrote: post #36

I am extremely insulated from ads online and have been for about a decade. Once in a while I have to browse on a device that does not have an ad blocker or most of the times does not even let you install one. Seeing a website that is SEoptimised and heavily ad supported feels like walking into a crack den. That this is the normal experience for the vast majority of users is sad.

Yeah. I use brave on all my devices. When somebody shows me a YouTube video on their device and three ads play before the video, or loads a local news page with all the ads, my reaction is "Wow! They sure are bombarding you guys to make up for us free-riders!"

Re: No adblocker detected

#227

Post by ainiriand »

mahrain wrote: post #214
Freak_NL wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever I open Google's Play Store on Android I get this feeling of walking into some dystopic shopping mall. I hardly ever come there (F-Droid covers all utilities for me, so Google's own app store is really only for official apps from banks, public transport, etc.), so its user hostile design always hits me like a wall of visual noise and clutter. At these moments that feeling that for most people getting bombarde…

What always surprises me is the sheer amount of fake, scammy, apps trying to appear as if they're something else. Trying to steal clicks from users looking for Adblock, VLC or other legitimate apps... it's a mess!

If it serves any purpose just today I've published docscandroid.app just because the document scanners out there are really scary and do not really fit my purpose. My app is not perfect but its mine and that is enough.

Re: No adblocker detected

#229

Post by dns_snek »

kelnos wrote: post #160
dns_snek wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No ads but it's far worse than just annoying — for me. I get annoyed when a video buffers for 10 seconds due to a technical hiccup. Being made to wait for up to a minute with pretend-technical issues and mocking messages like "Why am I seeing this?" that try to convince me that they're not doing this on purpose is insulting and enraging . I would gladly pay for an independent alternative but I will never pay for Yout…

On the other hand, I'd rather sit for 10-60 seconds waiting for (fake) buffering, than sit through a 10-60 second ad.

It doesn't stop there, it would also fake-buffer when you jumped to a different point in the video, it would be stuck in a broken transitional UI state for 10-30 seconds any time you navigated to a different page. Clearly they want people to get pissed off enough that they turn off the ad blocker, it's been getting worse over time.

Re: No adblocker detected

#230

Post by throwaway290 »

b3lvedere wrote: post #161
throwaway290 wrote: post #97

[flagged]

Why do corporations/publishers feel entitled that people feed them as much (personal) information as possible via invasive ads, even when these people did not consent to that? Businesses should really stop complaining the consumer is the problem here. The businesses made this model and expected consumers to gladly accept it. Don't want people to consume your content for free? Make it a subscription or something. Can'…

a guy makes a website and publishes useful stuff and wants to make money, not feed your personal information. if you feel it's wrong, make an ad platform that doesn't feed personal information. if you feel any ads and profit are wrong then clearly I'm talking to a communist. if you feel like the only answer is paywalls instead of ads then I'd like to see how happy you would be if that was reality.

this is leeching on expense of people without adblocks who have to endure more ads thanks to people with adblocks, for the above mentioned information publisher to make the same money

Post reply on HN