Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use AdBlock Plus but i do use AdBlock. I think its my decision to choose which ads i watch and which i don't. It's not stealing, Webmasters can detect if someone is using AdBlock or not.
> It's not stealing, Webmasters can detect if someone is using AdBlock or not. So what's your view on sites blocking people with AdBlock?
AdBlock Plus wins in court
31–40 of 117 posts
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#32Good. Although I prefer Ghostery. The main thing for me isn't even blocking ads as such. The main thing is blocking the absurd amount of crappy javascript that clogs up my browser, in which I have no interest. I find the unfiltered web insufferable these days.
If you want a suggestion for an alternative, I really don't have one. I'm currently using µBlock, which isn't bad, but requires a bit more setup than Ghostery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#33Personally I don't use Ad Blockers just due to the fact my own personal ethics feels I am stealing when I do use it. When I am teaching I have ad blocker installed because I don't want to get in trouble for what advertisement will be shown, especially YouTube. AdBlock Plus and their paid white list is the worst and I don't know why people use them.
Because they actually fight to protect our freedoms in courts. A "paid white list" is a small price to pay (considering you can turn it off entirely).
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't use AdBlock Plus but i do use AdBlock. I think its my decision to choose which ads i watch and which i don't. It's not stealing, Webmasters can detect if someone is using AdBlock or not.
> It's not stealing, Webmasters can detect if someone is using AdBlock or not. So what's your view on sites blocking people with AdBlock?
They should attempt to use technical means, though, as it's unlikely that a simple 'Do you use adblock?' prompt is going to work very well.
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> It's not stealing, Webmasters can detect if someone is using AdBlock or not. In other words it's not stealing unless you get caught? Edit: Relax people. Let's not get into another debate on copying vs. theft. I was merely pointing out that the parents analogy (which was the one that referenced stealing) was bad.
It's not stealing because nothing is stolen. Or what is your definition of stealing?
Websites rely on ad revenue. If the ads are blocked the website or streamers on Twitch do not receive the revenue. Just because it doesn't go into my pocket doesn't mean it isn't stealing in my own personal view.
For example if you take a sapphire from the Museum of Natural History and than throw away or lose the golf ball size 563 carat Star of India. You gained nothing from taking it but you still are guilty of stealing a diamond.
PS I am extremely conservative in my person morals. I am also fairly liberal in my view of society (At least that is what my Tea Party Inlaws and Libertarian friends say)
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#36Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#37Personally I don't use Ad Blockers just due to the fact my own personal ethics feels I am stealing when I do use it. When I am teaching I have ad blocker installed because I don't want to get in trouble for what advertisement will be shown, especially YouTube. AdBlock Plus and their paid white list is the worst and I don't know why people use them.
How do you feel about disabling javascript by default, and making things click-to-play? I ask because I think the line between "advert used for site finance," and "drive-by malware" can sometimes be blurry. For example: http://www.cnet.com/news/malware-delivered-by-yahoo-fox-goog... I think that when I click on a link I agree to see the content they provide. I'm not sure I really want to agree to third-party stuff wi…
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#38Good. Although I prefer Ghostery. The main thing for me isn't even blocking ads as such. The main thing is blocking the absurd amount of crappy javascript that clogs up my browser, in which I have no interest. I find the unfiltered web insufferable these days.
I used to love Ghostery, until I learned that their business model is to resell your browsing habits and profile back to advertisers. If you want a suggestion for an alternative, I really don't have one. I'm currently using µBlock, which isn't bad, but requires a bit more setup than Ghostery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock
...If you voluntarily opt into that program (Ghostrank), after reading the straight-forward description.
I don't understand why people find their business model so abhorrent when its entirely opt-in and they don't weasel around what ghostrank does. Surely you must find every service on the internet that you use for free, particularly Google, to be horrible as well?
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#39Good. Although I prefer Ghostery. The main thing for me isn't even blocking ads as such. The main thing is blocking the absurd amount of crappy javascript that clogs up my browser, in which I have no interest. I find the unfiltered web insufferable these days.
I used to love Ghostery, until I learned that their business model is to resell your browsing habits and profile back to advertisers. If you want a suggestion for an alternative, I really don't have one. I'm currently using µBlock, which isn't bad, but requires a bit more setup than Ghostery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock
Re: AdBlock Plus wins in court
#40Good. Although I prefer Ghostery. The main thing for me isn't even blocking ads as such. The main thing is blocking the absurd amount of crappy javascript that clogs up my browser, in which I have no interest. I find the unfiltered web insufferable these days.
I used to love Ghostery, until I learned that their business model is to resell your browsing habits and profile back to advertisers. If you want a suggestion for an alternative, I really don't have one. I'm currently using µBlock, which isn't bad, but requires a bit more setup than Ghostery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock