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

It’s OK to block ads (2015)

blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 114 posts

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#71

Post by npc_anon »

People block ads and/or not pay for content because they can. Simply because it's possible. People have been conditioned to consider any and all digital content to be worth zero. Yet continue to consume it for hours on end every day.

When not paying at all is an option people will reliably pick that option. They'll even go into extremes to avoid paying. I know somebody that plays a particular mobile game about an hour each day. Every round (taking 90s or so) it's interrupted by 1-3 mins of ads. It's maddening. She suffers through this instead of paying a one-time $4.99. We're talking about somebody firmly upper middle class.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#72

Post by jen20 »

npc_anon wrote: post #71

People block ads and/or not pay for content because they can. Simply because it's possible. People have been conditioned to consider any and all digital content to be worth zero. Yet continue to consume it for hours on end every day. When not paying at all is an option people will reliably pick that option. They'll even go into extremes to avoid paying. I know somebody that plays a particular mobile game about an hou…

Many things do not give you that option, and the ads are obnoxious and invasive to privacy. If that is the only option, you will get nothing from me, and your ads will be blocked.

Furthermore if there is a content subscription involved, I will only ever consider it via Apple because I refuse to risk having to telephone someone to cancel something I signed up for online.

The well has been poisoned by an obnoxious industry and that industry is unlikely to ever gain even a modicum of respectability.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#73

Post by hellisothers »

npc_anon wrote: post #71

People block ads and/or not pay for content because they can. Simply because it's possible. People have been conditioned to consider any and all digital content to be worth zero. Yet continue to consume it for hours on end every day. When not paying at all is an option people will reliably pick that option. They'll even go into extremes to avoid paying. I know somebody that plays a particular mobile game about an hou…

But privacy, it’s not just ads, you’re taking information from me. Also people have tried to avoid ads since forever, trying to not record ads onto VHS for instance, this isn’t new.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#74

Post by carlosjobim »

keernan wrote: post #2

For me, it is a straight forward proposition. There is literally nothing online so far that has ever interested me enough to pay money or with my eyeballs. I either see it without ads or move on without even a moment of thought.

You know that you are lying, in the defense of your precious precious wallet.

There is plenty of stuff online which is worth the money, just YouTube premium alone is a great bargain with the highest quality content conceivable inside. Or if you prefer empirical evidence, millions of people pay for Spotify.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#75

Post by IAmBroom »

npc_anon wrote: post #71

People block ads and/or not pay for content because they can. Simply because it's possible. People have been conditioned to consider any and all digital content to be worth zero. Yet continue to consume it for hours on end every day. When not paying at all is an option people will reliably pick that option. They'll even go into extremes to avoid paying. I know somebody that plays a particular mobile game about an hou…

Facile and wrong. People don't do anything "just because they can".

And anecdotes aren't data.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#76

Post by al_borland »

DanielHB wrote: post #67
al_borland wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To take this a step further, I have had people argue with me that tracking and profiling online is a good thing, because it provides more relevant ads for things they want to buy. There are people who actively want ads that can better target and manipulate them into giving up their money. I would like to say I've only run into one person like this, but no. I've lost count of how many of these people I've run into. I…

My partner got upset when I added a pihole to our network because she wouldn't see ads in google search. She said most of the time she doesn't mind the pihole but when she is actively looking for things to buy she wants the ads. What I ended up doing is setting up two separate wifi networks, one with the pihole DNS server and one without it. So she can opt to turn it on. But yeah overall I agree with you, the ads ske…

> For _some_ types of products the "barrier to entry" in the ad space can guarantee a certain level of quality (or at least reduce the change for scams).

I have always associated online ads with people who are trying to scam me. Like the giant “download” button ads on sites hosting actual software downloads. Decades of dealing with this kind of thing has led to a deep distrust of all online advertising, to the point where I pay for Kagi to not only not have ads in my search engine, but not even support the business model of using ads to fund a website.

I see people get scammed all the time from ads. It’s an easy way for the scammers to funnel users to their site. Most people I know have tried buying something based on a Facebook ad, from some random Shopify site, and never got their purchase.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#77

Post by amadeuspagel »

This is one of the many cases where the dishonest rationalization of a selfish act is worse then the act itself. I block ads because it's convenient, but I don't deny that I'm free-riding on websites that only exist because other people view ads, I don't pollute our shared understanding of ethics, economics and the web with some bullshit rationalization of something I only do because it's convenient.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#78

Post by DanielHB »

lrvick wrote: post #69
DanielHB wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My partner got upset when I added a pihole to our network because she wouldn't see ads in google search. She said most of the time she doesn't mind the pihole but when she is actively looking for things to buy she wants the ads. What I ended up doing is setting up two separate wifi networks, one with the pihole DNS server and one without it. So she can opt to turn it on. But yeah overall I agree with you, the ads ske…

You are more accommodating than me. Profit driven targeted content of any kind, especially ads, are poison. I could never knowingly enable anyone in my household to harm themselves with something so toxic to brain health and quality of life. In terms of things I want far away from my home and family, surveillance capitalism driven technology ranks up there with meth.

She does hate it everywhere else though and I find google search ads are not nearly as bad when you are actively looking for a specific product.

But yeah I tend to agree with you, the companies/products paying for the ads are not necessarily the best ones to buy from.

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#79

Post by ndriscoll »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #77

This is one of the many cases where the dishonest rationalization of a selfish act is worse then the act itself. I block ads because it's convenient, but I don't deny that I'm free-riding on websites that only exist because other people view ads, I don't pollute our shared understanding of ethics, economics and the web with some bullshit rationalization of something I only do because it's convenient.

The FBI literally suggested people block ads to avoid being defrauded. My understanding of the web was that it was first and foremost a non-commercial space, and spammers have always been impinging on that. Blocking their nonsense has always been the correct course of action.

In the case of children, I actually strongly believe it is immoral to allow then to be inundated with ads. It runs completely counter to teaching them virtues like temperance. It is not just "convenient" but an actual moral imperative to keep them away from those who would push consumerism onto them. This has only become more obvious as climate change worsens as the top problem they will inherit, or as we see 70% of adults in the US now destroying their bodies with disordered eating while still ubiquitous ads encourage them to continue. Ads are a blight. Allowing them to reach the next generation is somewhere between neglect and abuse.

So no, your idea of these things is not "our shared understanding".

Re: It’s OK to block ads (2015)

#80

Post by OldfieldFund »

npc_anon wrote: post #71

People block ads and/or not pay for content because they can. Simply because it's possible. People have been conditioned to consider any and all digital content to be worth zero. Yet continue to consume it for hours on end every day. When not paying at all is an option people will reliably pick that option. They'll even go into extremes to avoid paying. I know somebody that plays a particular mobile game about an hou…

"all digital content to be worth zero."

People are making millions/year just by writing articles on Substack. Just look at the "paid leaderboards", number of paid subscribers, and multiply by 70% of the annual price of the newsletter.

Our newsletter is doing mid-6-figures. You simply can't find that content anywhere else, and I am not aware of a newsletter-piracy phenomenon. Even if it existed, I think many people would pay to have guaranteed day-1 access.

Post reply on HN