Nothing is going to tell me I can't use adblock and nobody will control whether I do or not. I don't feel bad using it at all. Seeing a webpage with 40 million annoying advertisements on it is disgusting. My system can handle these fine, I just don't want to see idiotic advertisements everywhere on MY computer.
- Status
Omegaclawe
Honorable
- Sep 28, 2013
- 2
- 0
- 10,510
Blocking food from children? Drama queen, much?
Ultimately, the web is the wild west of advertising. In TV ads, these ads cannot steal your information, mine your data, run malicious scripts, etc. Incidentally, there are also ways to skip these, and that has hardly killed Television.
Meanwhile, on the computer, Ads can take a silent experience and make it very loud. They can force you away from what you're doing (particularly problematic if you're on mobile and using an in-app browser. A number of links off Reddit are more or less unreadable without an adblocker due to the redirects), pretend to be a part of something else (e.g. download pages with 16 "download" button, where the 15 ads clearly have the larger ones) and, even if you don't notice them, they can still use exploits and vulnerabilities to mine your data or potentially take over your computer, clearly without your consent or knowledge. Definitely unethical, possibly even illegal.
So how can we ensure we aren't stalked by these ne'er-do-wells? Ideally, sites would police themselves and only allow quality, ethical advertisements, but due to greed and laziness, this simply is not the case. We need some other way to protect ourselves... enter Adblock et. al.
Adblock is a business, yes. Notably, they are in a position to make a huge amount of money by using their ad-blocking software to spy on its users and sell that to their "approved" advertisers, which would really be a racket. Instead, they chose a more ethical path, wherein they don't really make any money off their users. Instead, they chose to allow an inoffensive subset of ads, which, yes, they do require a pittance from advertisers to keep the lights on, but keeping up with the unscrupulous methods is hard work, and there aren't many people who'd do it for free.
This reins ads back down to inoffensive levels, as they should have been in the first place. These protections would not need to exist if sites would simply keep their ad quality high.
Sites like Tom's Hardware. Don't act innocent; there are 26 different sites loaded by this page alone that are ignoring my do not track requests. You think I'm not going to protect myself from that?
Ultimately, the web is the wild west of advertising. In TV ads, these ads cannot steal your information, mine your data, run malicious scripts, etc. Incidentally, there are also ways to skip these, and that has hardly killed Television.
Meanwhile, on the computer, Ads can take a silent experience and make it very loud. They can force you away from what you're doing (particularly problematic if you're on mobile and using an in-app browser. A number of links off Reddit are more or less unreadable without an adblocker due to the redirects), pretend to be a part of something else (e.g. download pages with 16 "download" button, where the 15 ads clearly have the larger ones) and, even if you don't notice them, they can still use exploits and vulnerabilities to mine your data or potentially take over your computer, clearly without your consent or knowledge. Definitely unethical, possibly even illegal.
So how can we ensure we aren't stalked by these ne'er-do-wells? Ideally, sites would police themselves and only allow quality, ethical advertisements, but due to greed and laziness, this simply is not the case. We need some other way to protect ourselves... enter Adblock et. al.
Adblock is a business, yes. Notably, they are in a position to make a huge amount of money by using their ad-blocking software to spy on its users and sell that to their "approved" advertisers, which would really be a racket. Instead, they chose a more ethical path, wherein they don't really make any money off their users. Instead, they chose to allow an inoffensive subset of ads, which, yes, they do require a pittance from advertisers to keep the lights on, but keeping up with the unscrupulous methods is hard work, and there aren't many people who'd do it for free.
This reins ads back down to inoffensive levels, as they should have been in the first place. These protections would not need to exist if sites would simply keep their ad quality high.
Sites like Tom's Hardware. Don't act innocent; there are 26 different sites loaded by this page alone that are ignoring my do not track requests. You think I'm not going to protect myself from that?
Reading through these comments took away a lot of time I could have spent looking at advertisements. Therefore, commenters are stealing food from children's mouths.
As long as were whining: Think about jobs lost (and all of the children that would starve) if Planned Obsolescence weren't integral to society. Try and argue that point and see what it stirs up.
As long as were whining: Think about jobs lost (and all of the children that would starve) if Planned Obsolescence weren't integral to society. Try and argue that point and see what it stirs up.
Kissmyne
Estimable
- Jan 30, 2015
- 6
- 0
- 4,520
Lol @ ad blocking software being theft. Have you ever considered changing your revenue model?
I would consider ad blocking software to be more akin to a bug screen on a window that you have open to get some fresh air in the house. You want the air, not the bugs that could theoretically get in the window with it being open. I may be depriving the bugs from getting into my house(and propagating), but they have no business there anyway.
I would consider ad blocking software to be more akin to a bug screen on a window that you have open to get some fresh air in the house. You want the air, not the bugs that could theoretically get in the window with it being open. I may be depriving the bugs from getting into my house(and propagating), but they have no business there anyway.
wisemansaid
Estimable
- May 22, 2015
- 2
- 0
- 4,510
An ethics talk as to why we should disable our adblocker? I thought this was a tech site.
People that know how, will disable ads; simple as that. Ads are annoying and CPU/GPU intensive (as in, I'm wasting energy for stuff I don't want to see in the first place). Find a workaround (or a middle ground) or lose profit.
People that know how, will disable ads; simple as that. Ads are annoying and CPU/GPU intensive (as in, I'm wasting energy for stuff I don't want to see in the first place). Find a workaround (or a middle ground) or lose profit.
I completely disagree with this article. Mr Piltch, can you please disable all of your spam filters for your e-mail? That's essentially what you're getting at. BRING IN THE ADVERTISEMENTS! You are out of your mind, now making me check who authors an article, and if I see yours, definitely skip. Complete trash man. Can't believe I'm going to sign up for an account just to tell you this, but this article actually has pissed me off all day! Haha.
You can take this logic and shove it. The internet was originally meant to be free and still should be free. There is plenty of free content on the web that gets pushed out by paid product placement keeping these sites in the top 10-20 on a search result. You dont like this then dont post things on the internet. We will be happy to stay with free content.
In addition in many states, like Virginia, it is illegal to circumvent a security feature of a users computer system. A pop up blocker is a security feature. So when you bombard a users browser with clicks to get your add through you are committing a misdemeanor or a felony in some cases. No one has time to deal with that as a legitimate crime now but when enforcement entities discover how much money they could potentially gain through enforcement the tables could turn.
In short you dont like add blocking leave and dont let the door hit you in the @$$.
In addition in many states, like Virginia, it is illegal to circumvent a security feature of a users computer system. A pop up blocker is a security feature. So when you bombard a users browser with clicks to get your add through you are committing a misdemeanor or a felony in some cases. No one has time to deal with that as a legitimate crime now but when enforcement entities discover how much money they could potentially gain through enforcement the tables could turn.
In short you dont like add blocking leave and dont let the door hit you in the @$$.
hans_pcguy
Distinguished
- Nov 13, 2010
- 47
- 0
- 18,610
Dude, you have successfully concocted your own alter-reality. I have seen people get carried away with supporting their own company in the face of reality but this takes the cake. Dude, go on a vacation for a while. get some fresh air. Your mind is spinning some pretty wild stuff.
JohnMD1022
Distinguished
- Jun 1, 2006
- 29
- 0
- 18,580
The Internet development was paid for by US taxpayers.
I was paying for that, thru my tax money, all those years.
Don't tell me I am stealing from someone who never paid for the development.
I was paying for that, thru my tax money, all those years.
Don't tell me I am stealing from someone who never paid for the development.
wisemansaid
Estimable
- May 22, 2015
- 2
- 0
- 4,510
Failed to mention (very real) privacy concerns over web tracking and a history of ad exploits known to infect computers with malware. People taking advantage of advertising companies that don't think twice to take advantage of an end user -- yeah, I think that fits the saying, "what comes around goes around."
liammac001
Estimable
- Nov 26, 2014
- 8
- 0
- 4,510
Personally I have no other choice as my internet is so slow that without an ad blocker its virtually impossible to use the internet.
"Think of the children", but that's one problem. A big flashing ad saying "Your computer is infected" may actually scare a child to install bad software.
However, here are a few reasons why I have NoScript:
1. If I'm at work, I don't want to play video, period, unless it's job-related. I am allowed to research trends in technology, but bandwidth spikes for the wrong reasons can get me into trouble. I also don't like video on many websites while browsing at home since video can bog down a connection
2. In the days of MySpace, I had Winamp running at a comfortable volume level. Flash blockers were a godsend for when you go on someone's MySpace page and they had music. I didn't hear two songs playing at the same time
3. There was a banner ad that had audio. In one case, it blasted my speakers at a very loud volume.
4. I'm trying to read. I don't need a video distracting my attention.
5. So many ad networks track you. I rather avoid spreading around my digital footprint as much as possible, even though it's quite hard to
6. Ad networks have gotten infected
7. Many of them sell shady software.
8. Some of them are downright gross. Seeing them once isn't bad, but I don't want to see that over and over again
I don't mind ads because they do help pay the bills, but when they are overly in-your-face, you want them to go away.
However, here are a few reasons why I have NoScript:
1. If I'm at work, I don't want to play video, period, unless it's job-related. I am allowed to research trends in technology, but bandwidth spikes for the wrong reasons can get me into trouble. I also don't like video on many websites while browsing at home since video can bog down a connection
2. In the days of MySpace, I had Winamp running at a comfortable volume level. Flash blockers were a godsend for when you go on someone's MySpace page and they had music. I didn't hear two songs playing at the same time
3. There was a banner ad that had audio. In one case, it blasted my speakers at a very loud volume.
4. I'm trying to read. I don't need a video distracting my attention.
5. So many ad networks track you. I rather avoid spreading around my digital footprint as much as possible, even though it's quite hard to
6. Ad networks have gotten infected
7. Many of them sell shady software.
8. Some of them are downright gross. Seeing them once isn't bad, but I don't want to see that over and over again
I don't mind ads because they do help pay the bills, but when they are overly in-your-face, you want them to go away.
- Jul 15, 2014
- 571
- 0
- 5,210
One problem I have is the content of the ads. If ads were better moderated and not quite frequently of half or fully naked people, perhaps I would not use Adblock+. But there are just too many sites on the web I cannot visit without ads that say "1 millionth visitor" and other tricky (not really) gimmicks. I think the businesses are at fault for not verifying ads before they are actually published on the site. Heck, on Tomsguide I saw a nude ad once, and while some of you welcome those, I don't.
A perfect example is schools. They don't want to see inappropriate ads so they install adblocks onto their browsers. As a web designer myself, many of those ads are poorly optimized and programmed. On mobile browsers, sometimes I cannot even close those full-screen ads that pop up. If ads were more appropriate, honest, less clunky, and cleaner-looking (they are typically ugly and pixelated) I would welcome them more.
A perfect example is schools. They don't want to see inappropriate ads so they install adblocks onto their browsers. As a web designer myself, many of those ads are poorly optimized and programmed. On mobile browsers, sometimes I cannot even close those full-screen ads that pop up. If ads were more appropriate, honest, less clunky, and cleaner-looking (they are typically ugly and pixelated) I would welcome them more.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question windows explorer performance issues with large files: need help!
- Started by happy888
- Replies: 0
-
-
Question Streaming from upstairs pc to downstairs tv
- Started by KninE
- Replies: 2
-
Question Can i run my dell laptop without o.d.d. cable?- Started by Yentrok
- Replies: 1
-
Question What laptop to buy that is compatible with Google pixel 8 pro phone?
- Started by dorytke1
- Replies: 1
-
Facebook
Twitter