Stop, Thief! Why Using an Ad Blocker Is Stealing

[captaincharisma]

with most ads trying to trick you, install adware/spyware, or just put tracking cookies on your computer. why should we stop using ad blockers again?

 

[MasterMace]

Advertising in itself is insecure. Blackhat 2013 had speakers on showing how they could use advertising to do many vile things, the most basic of which a DDOS, that is - use an advertisement slot to force a user to query/download from a server. They then expanded upon this, by showing a browser limits itself to 6 instances at a time for performance, which is a security feature in this regard, but that they could use ftp to ignore this.

Because advertisements are a natural security risk, people choose to block them. Most malware came from advertisements.

 

[ratzes]

This article is nuts, I'm not sure what its actually appealing to. If its saying that people who block ads are stealing, then couldn't the same thing be said about a page with a donation button who "expect donations" even if its an irrational expectation?

Surely that's ridiculous, how are blocking ads any different? Is there a much more reasonable expectation that ads won't be blocked? They do after all send a link to MY computer and then ask my computer to go communicate to another sever, grab the content, run the content on MY hardware in order to put something in MY brain with a lot of ads also having a property where they are built for the product placement that happens without my conscious awareness. This roundabout is way more of an unreasonable expectation than a donation button, however the ads have benefited, I think, by not reminded you all the time of the real mechanics behind it. This is not to mention the insane mechanics by which metrics are gathered and users are tracked behind these ads. Some claim that ad companies know more about you than you do. Consider that case where Target knew a girl was pregnant before she did, and she only became aware because she was being advertised for baby related things. If this is the kind of firepower behind ads, I want no part of it. Where does the exploitation of human psychology end?

To claim that I should turn off ad block, so I can run around thinking that holding a pepsi can makes me fit in with the indie music crowd in NY, is crazy. Its not just the "intrusive" ads that are a problem, with all the big data, it's also the ads that influence your subconscious, and there is no easy way to ignore those, they can be so very subtle.

I think asking for donations is actually a much more reasonable expectation than what you are proposing, one of the two may be critical to a websites survival, but if you can't pander to a donation button, you won't be able to pander to eye/mind rape.

 

[AaronMK]

Until wiretap and "metadata" like tracking of my browsing habits is illegal with penalties harsh enough to bring even a company like Google to its knees if they make any tracking attempts, I'll block the ads.

And don't try to tell me you need to track me, or you won't be able to target the ads well enough to make money. For a very long time, advertising worked and made both the advertisers and the companies selling various placements lots of money by targeted the ads in context with the delivered content.

 

[brucek2]

Yep. Like everyone else: blocking wasn't motivated by a desire not to see ads, it was made necessary in order to have my browser not crash.

 

[napster100]

And if you have a site blocked and it is running mostly high-quality ads, you would never know.

High quality or not, I've never clicked an ad in my life, and I'm not about to start to. If adblock users are stealing from the site's owners, then they are also stealing from their users, which brings this quote around "do not do unto others". I view all adverts as malware, malware is designed to manipulate or change things on a computer, and that is exactly what it does to a webpage.

 

[byebye1]

this article alone will stop me from ever coming back to this site

 

[draphius]

such a joke. if were stealing what are we getting from them? i havent made a dime off blocking any ads. plus ive never bought one thing from an ad online in the entirety of my life on the internet which goes back to the beginning of the internet.im not gonna change now.

 

[jldevoy]

Maybe if Google et al didn't track your every movement then allow every shyster willing to pay to target you with ads people wouldn't feel the need to block them. The advertisers have gotten so intrusive that some pages now default to auto running video ads with sound enabled which just p*sses me off.

 

[garryash]

I use this site for the information and help from fellow users. I have no interest in adverts as If I am thinking of buying something I will do a search on the internet for such. Not look at adverts. If TOMS got rid of the advertising then I for one would willing pay a modest annual fee to use the site providing the type of content remained as it is now and was not hi-jacked by companies putting their ads in disguised as readers comments!!!

 

[galeener]

If they put them on a page and not in the middle obscuring what I want to look at I might look at them. Forcing me to look at them before being able to see what I chose to see is the issue I have a problem with. It should be my choice not and not forced upon me. So when it is I just skip them and or what I was going to look at not like I can't find it some where else. This then makes me rethink the site with all the advertisements if I should visit there at all.

 

[Charm3d]

Man we are bombarded with ads every page on every site. You wander why people are sick to death of them. 99% of advertising is complete garbage I never want to see. A lot of it is selling propaganda to people and slowing the browsers down and closing pop ups adds to rsi.

I don't even watch TV because I get sick of ads all the time. man it's come to the stage where it seems you get just as much ad time as you do the actual show. Advertising is noise and jumbled crap we are sick of seeing and hearing.

It's really great when you are on the net looking up stuff and all of a sudden a friggen popup ad starts screaming though the speaks. Advertising companies are like finger nails down a black board.

If they where everywhere all the time bombarding us. Then maybe people would not mind them from time to time. But the world in drowning in advertising.

Even on facebook some asshole posts some interesting posts and every page has at least 50% advertisement. Then you have other sites post cute little vids from YouTube, but first you have to watch an ad.

Consumers are sick to death of being bombarded, overwhelmed and screamed at by adverts. I can imagine hell would be a place that is 24-7 non stop advertising.

 

[TheAC]

On this page alone there are 12, no... Now it's 14 adverts.

So please don't say there are no adverts on the forums.

 

[gekn76]

This is by far one of the worst arguments I have stumbled upon this year!

Ads are by definition spam today, there are next to none banners that intentionally promotes the "deal" behind the banner ad. Even worst is when companies tries to camouflage their message as a real article/story that is hustling on a new lvl. Seriously though companies existed before internet ads was invented and this is starting to sound like the music business frustration about piracy, in the end it is very simple, provide good to decent content and you are worthy to subscribe/read etc. But WE the readers decides what we wan't and HOW we get it COMPANY provides what WE want not what COMPANY want's.

 

[hst101rox]

"Every time you block an ad, what you're really blocking is food from entering a child's mouth. "
Every time an Ad pops up or a banner ad animates, my computer consumes more power and causes more pollution CAUSING YOUR BABY TO INHALE MORE EMISSIONS from the partial non-renewable power sources where I live.

Happy?
Adblock plus FTW, sorry.

 

[vsdagama]

Time to reload this page without adblock enabled: 56 seconds
(untill the thing stopped circling and the partners sidebar was loaded in)

Time to reload the page with adblock: 6 seconds

'nuff said.

 

[lumankicks]

There is a case of over advertising. Like for instance the "answers" websites that have well over 30 advertisements on one screen causing my 10 meg internet to slow down to 56k speeds.

Or a certain *ahem* tech news site that installs spyware hotlinks into its articles everytime you visit it.

 

[alextheblue]

First of all, I do agree that Purch should take command of their advertising again.In the short term this will hurt them. However once ads improve to a level more users find acceptable, they could appeal to those users to stop blocking the ads. Many will still block the ads and scream entitlement (everything on the internet should be free somehow without any revenue! yarr!) but a lot of people would come around and whitelist them.

If you must, find a new way to make a buck.

Nobody like ads. I sure don't. But guess what? You might not like the alternative - how about you can't read any articles until you shell out that buck yourself? Can you imagine the outrage?

It's MY computer and MY network. If I want to see ads, that's MY choice. But I'm not going to waste my bandwidth on crap I don't want. Period. End of story.

Your network, huh? That ceases to be true the moment you load up a website that isn't owned by you. Now it's not only your network, your bandwidth. Now its theirs as well, and their content too (it costs money to run this site, including costs not related to the site itself such as employing reviewers). THG and sites like it are ONLY free because of the ads. If people like me who whitelist Tom's all blocked the ads like you did, they'd have to start charging money... or worse. "This review brought to you by Biostar!" Can you freaking imagine how ugly that could get?

 

[McHenryB]

First of all, I do agree that Purch should take command of their advertising again.In the short term this will hurt them. However once ads improve to a level more users find acceptable, they could appeal to those users to stop blocking the ads. Many will still block the ads and scream entitlement (everything on the internet should be free somehow without any revenue! yarr!) but a lot of people would come around and whitelist them.

If you must, find a new way to make a buck.

Nobody like ads. I sure don't. But guess what? You might not like the alternative - how about you can't read any articles until you shell out that buck yourself? Can you imagine the outrage?

It's MY computer and MY network. If I want to see ads, that's MY choice. But I'm not going to waste my bandwidth on crap I don't want. Period. End of story.

Your network, huh? That ceases to be true the moment you load up a website that isn't owned by you. Now it's not only your network, your bandwidth. Now its theirs as well, and their content too (it costs money to run this site, including costs not related to the site itself such as employing reviewers). THG and sites like it are ONLY free because of the ads. If people like me who whitelist Tom's all blocked the ads like you did, they'd have to start charging money... or worse. "This review brought to you by Biostar!" Can you freaking imagine how ugly that could get?

Voting up your own answer? That's a bit desperate, isn't it?

 

[apoapoapoapo]

Turn on Firefox's Tracking Protection : webpages load time of 44% improvement :
http/ieee-security.org/TC/SPW2015/W2SP/papers/W2SP_2015_submission_32.pdf