Live data from Hacker News

Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

imlefthanded.com

771–780 of 844 posts

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should I give them this free compute? Why should they give you free content?

Interesting that I had to scroll this far to find a defense for the payment of the modern web. How’s this different than piracy? The unspoken agreement is that you get the content in exchange for eyeballs on ads or cash up front.

> How’s this different than piracy? The unspoken agreement...

Because movie and game studios don't rely on "unspoken agreements".

In most cases publishers don't even ask me to serve ads. They try to go behind my back by asking my browser. When my browser tells them "no", they still have the option to ask me. Some sites do, and I will either turn ads on or walk away without reading anything.

When the agreement becomes spoken it becomes an agreement. There's no agreement when there's no communication.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not the responsibility of Internet users to ensure the jobs of people in the advertising industry. Compelling users to view ads (when they view other content) to protect those jobs would be an infringement on individual rights for a very poor reason. That's why ad blockers and DVRs are legal in every country that I'm aware of.

So, you think that the only people who's jobs are affected by this theft are those in the advertising industry? I have news for you. Those jobs are not affected at all. Advertising isn't going away, ever. The channels change, but advertising survives. There's plenty pre-internet history on that. The jobs that are affected are those from the sites that rely on ad income to pay for salaries and their costs. If 100% of…

No business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term. And every business owner goes in with the understanding that success is not guaranteed.

Hopefully, your friend is keeping track of the increasing popularity of ad blocking and developing alternative sources of revenue to supplement their display ads. Affiliate links, sponsored articles, subscriptions for premium content, merchandise, and donations are common monetization pathways for websites.

Reading a website without loading or viewing the ads is not "stealing" or "theft", since the site owner voluntarily provided the content free of charge. If the site owner doesn't want people to read their content for free, they should charge for it. No viewer is obligated to load or consume all of the content provided in any medium, and a site owner has no inherent right to compel a visitor to spend time or attention on any part of the site.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens when the content provider is treated to 100% ad blockage and a thousand people lose their jobs? Ad-blocking users think of sites as being completely devoid of any humanity. In most cases, nothing could be farther from the truth. You might have rationalized that you are not stealing anything. Yet, you are, you are stealing the work product of dozens to thousands or tens of thousands of people. Beyond that…

If your business model is no longer profitable then you should go do something else. I'm not obligated to pay for cable when Netflix is cheaper and better. If your family depends on that Cable money to survive, well that's sad but not my problem. Make a better product, change your business model, do something. Again, content providers are free to stop providing content at any time. There's not much else to say here.…

> content providers are free to stop providing content at any time

There's a fundamental lack of morality in a philosophy that does not recognize and respect property. You know that you are interfering with the ability of a site owner and their employees earing money for their product. You know this well. This is what ad blockers do. And yet, as a result of the principles you purport to uphold, rather than choosing NOT to consume their product as a demonstration of your commitment, you take it and interfere with their business.

You can jump around as many hoops as you wish in trying to justify this. The bottom line is that you claim to have principles and yet behave exactly as if you had none. People work to provide you with valuable content and services and you take it for nothing.

This isn't an argument about Netflix or some other streaming service. This is about taking from others while actually promoting a complete negation of revenue. If your ad-blocking utopia comes to pass, none of these sites will have income. So, you'll take and take and take, until you kill them.

The only people who say things like what you and many have said on this thread are those who have never started, run and managed a non-trivial business. Being responsible for payroll makes you learn things you can learn in no other way.

When I see a business, a site, I see the people behind it. After all, we are likely not talking about junk sites and content farms here.

I am sure you are not using an ad blocker just so you can visit that wonderful content farm you love to frequent. No, you are using ad blockers on sites that actually deliver valuable content and services to you. Content and services that, precisely because they are valuable, time, money and take effort to create, support and maintain. You know they use ads to finance the operation, and you block them. That is a morally putrid position to take and even worse to work so hard to justify.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#774

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a normal world that would make sense but we're dealing with businesses and MBAs who need to incessantly increase their revenue. As a paying customer they could squeeze more, you're willing to pay. Non-paying customers are used as a product themselves but it's extremely hard to extract more.

That's just normal business though, and my statement is intrinsically correcting for that. Netflix has the same MBAs and bean counters, but their product has no ads and orders of magnitude less clickbait. Its clear they make content geared for their users, not for their advertisers. Youtube is very heavy with advertiser friendly content, and both creators and users pay heavily for that (but its *quote* Free! *unquote…

I was watching lost in space and one of those episodes had an entire subplot about Oreos. It was so blatant it ruined that episode.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newpipe is also youtube reverse engineered, as is yt-dl/dlp. No need for closed source.

Vanced is a patched official youtube app.

But do they distribute the source of the patches?

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we fundamentally disagree on what "stealing" means.

Correct. You have no idea what it means to respect someone's property and livelihood. Hence a creative interpretation that allows you to take while explicitly blocking their ability to generate revenue.

If a site owner publishes content and makes it available free of charge, it is available for visitors to consume free of charge. Your argument shows a lack of respect for the autonomy of internet users, who are not obligated to consume ads just because they are presented alongside other site content, just as TV viewers are not obligated to watch the ads during commercial breaks. Site owners have alternative means of generating revenue (affiliate links, sponsored content, merchandise, donations, etc.) and the option of charging for site content. No site owner is entitled to revenue from advertising.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember this. "People want personalized information on products they are interested in. How else would they find out about them?" As if people would be at a loss buying a car or breakfast cereal or a pair of shoes without ads.

Full disclosure, I run ad blocker, I love my ad blocker. I get what you're trying to say, but here's a counter example. I have a hobby of astrophography. I live in a rural area without many other people nearby interested in the stars, much less a highly technical hobby like astrophography. Asking on message boards like cloudynights, or reddit gets you a lot of well meaning beginners offering advice outside of their s…

I get what you are saying, and as a young hobbyist back in the day I loved perusing ads in specialist magazines. These days though I'm a much more informed and involved buyer, and have found that ads are usually not a great indicator of the best product or service for a particular need. I don't agree that online advice is worse than ads. It's a matter of doing the legwork to find the right place online for a particular interest, and also cross-referencing multiple sources to avoid getting caught by astroturfing. Ads are biased by their design and nature, and in most cases the placer of the ad has zero interest in making sure you choose the best product. They want you to buy their product even if it's not the best fit.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You think you are entitled to free pizza. When companies SEO-shove it in my face and almost literally beg me to take it.. oh I don't feel entitled but it's hard to avoid. Stop shoving it in my face and I won't take it. > And then reality hits: There was never any free pizza. And the pizza is gone. Along with the jobs and everything else it created. So clickbait, SEO spam sites, content farms, and other trash that s…

You are exaggerating, the vast majority of the ad-supported internet does not fit your "clickbait, SEO spam sites, content farms, and other trash" narrative. Once again, it is convenient to construct such a narrative to justify taking from truly useful sites. I must ask: Do you mean to say that you only visit "clickbait, SEO spam sites, content farms, and other trash" sites with your ad blockers? Likely not. What is…

If a site owner doesn't want to provide content for free of charge, then they shouldn't do that. Nobody is forcing a site owner to provide free content. Site owners can charge for the content if they want to.

But if a site owner does choose to provide their content for free, it is not the responsibility of the site visitor to ensure that such a business model is successful. Internet users do not have any legal or moral obligation to avoid consuming content that is provided free of charge. Internet users also do not have any legal or moral obligation to consume all of the content that is presented in one place.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#779

I've had YouTube Premium since its inception. Whenever I'm around someone else who puts on a free-tier version of YouTube its rather shocking how frequent and intrusive the commercial ads are.

> Whenever I'm around someone else who puts on a free-tier version of YouTube its rather shocking how frequent and intrusive the commercial ads are. Also, when I accidentally open a video in a private browsing window where I'm not logged in. DAMN IT WHY IS ALL THESE ADS. Although, I have to say that the ads on YouTube were some of the most targeted of any site, and I would often sit through them.

you can enable addons in private mode

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vanced is a patched official youtube app.

But do they distribute the source of the patches?

I searched some time ago and didn't find any, so they probably don't. They do distribute the sources of their manager app and their fork of microG tho.
Post reply on HN