How Wired Is Going to Handle Ad Blocking

That might buy the publisher (a) some credibility, and (b) an incentive to publish decent quality articles and not clickbait headed by misleading summaries.

Might some people abuse it? Sure. Probably. But I think that a large majority would not. Most of us do get it that people need to get paid.

You should focus on growing sustainably, instead of selling yourselves to advertisers for quick cash. God knows there are a plethora of other places we can get our content from. There's enough information pollution in our daily lives - I won't accept you polluting my reading of your 'well-written' articles.

So, in summary... good riddance.

On Wired, I got what? 100 folks all doing the same thing only with more taste and style?

I get the fact that Wired, on average, is better consumable content than Facebook, but hell, Facebook is free. The rest of the net is free.

I do not have an answer for the Wired guys, but I gotta admit it's sad/funny that Facebook and Google are such close partners with so many content providers. They're the guys driving the bus that's taking you over the cliff.

For the record, I own the device or app that consumes my content over the net. If I choose to own a device or app that only displays text, or only displays text from certain domains? That's my business, not yours. You can certainly turn the spigot off or on, and perhaps you'll get me to pay for you turning it on, but that's the limit of our interaction on this matter. What kind of device I use or whether or not I see certain things you want me to see is none of your freaking business.

In addition, as far as I'm concerned, any information I provide back to the server about what kind of browser I'm using is highly provisional and subject to change without notice. It is a courtesy that I provide anything.

It continues to amaze me that people who are in the business of providing entertainment somehow feel that it's a good thing to go to war with the people they are entertaining. For the life of me I just don't get how that makes any sense.

One day somebody is going to write a "meta browser", a browser that opens up other browsers in invisible windows and surfs the web, then sucks out filtered content for the user to consume. (There would be a provision for faking out credentials, spoofing the signature, resetting the cookies, signing up under assumed/real names, and so forth) Once that day comes, both the browser vendors an the content providers are going to be unhappy. But that's where we're headed if this radar vs. radar detector battle continues forward. Content consumers will win. They always do. (I imagine we're going to see a big push for legislative relief here. Prepare yourselves.)

  echo 127.0.0.1 www.wired.com >> hosts