Anti-Ad wrote:The need to opt out from "acceptable" (I dispute there is anything as an acceptable ad) advertising is condescending to users and goes against what taking back the web is about.
If people want ads, let them opt into pollution on their visited web pages. If they want to be tracked, let them opt into big brother. If they want their inbox clogged with spam, let them opt into the spam.
Users who don't wish to be assaulted with marketing should not have to opt out of advertising they didn't ask for and don't want.
Needing to opt out from digital pollution is a page out of the advertisers' playbook, not the privacy geeks' playbook.
This is why I run a very heavy hosts file and a local ad-killing proxy as well. I always wanted a backup for if anything slipped through ABP by accident. Now it looks like I will have to use multiple layers of advertising protection because ABP is no longer fully trustworthy.
It isn't your job to monetize the websites of others. People who install ABP are making a conscious choice to opt out of the pervasive consumer culture. They don't want advertising. Asking them if they can tolerate some advertising is a poor form for a poll.
I totally agree with Anti-Ad. As a sysadmin Ive created my own ABP filters, edited my /etc/hosts file and I run my own Apache webserver. However after reading through this forum, Ive also downloaded a local copy of ABP 1.3.9 for a future manual install (before you decide to yank it from the website); I will not upgrade ABP when prompted. I'll replace those ads with my own local images from my webserver.
Im so against advertising and marketing, that I have multiple profiles both FireFox and SeaMonkey depending on what I want to do (1 for email, 1 for social not-working, etc) -- and -- I manually go accept/reject cookies as they come in.
So continue to shoot yourself in the foot, but be happy in the fact that I will at least stay with an older version of ABP until the browsers no longer support it.
RedneckBabe wrote:OMG!! SOMEONE CALL THE WAAAAMBULANCE!
Quite a few in here, who regularly cheat content creators out of money, screaming 'bout betrayal, extortion, morals and ethics. The duplicity in y'alls position is oustanding.
Maybe you should do a gut check, each month send money to all websites that you've betrayed and cheated out of income, and help eliminate the need for ads all together. Maybe a group of you upstanding net citizens could help eliminate all advertising on the internet by actually paying for the content you consume. Novel idea, eh?
Before drowning in your own tears, I have several appropriate courses of action:
- uninstall ABP and go away
- code your own, improved version
- hire someone to code your own, improved version
- opt-out of the new feature
- cry some more, that always helps
I'm sure the content creator wakes up every day and thinks to herself, "I just LOVE providing all this content and having you cheat me out of money....maybe I'll work a couple extra hours today because in America, the more 'ya work the more 'ya earn!"
You can keep your pollution off of my computer. If you don't like it, put up a paywall.
I refuse to engage any advertising which slips through, as do most ad haters, so we aren't helping your statistics anyway. People who don't engage advertising lower your metrics.
To add to what Anti-Ad said, if content providers are using websites to generate revenue via ads, then I think they should get real jobs. Again, I run my own webserver, free of ads, and I provide my content for FREE (novel idea, eh?). How do I make money then? Working as a SysAdmin for a University. There's no duplicity in my position; I'll always do my best to block the tracking and the advertising AND provide free information to the 'Net to those who read my information.
I can accept, in theory, that print business (newspapers, magazines, etc) use ads in their websites much like they use ads in print. However I skip over ads in print much like I block ads on their sites. They can make their money off of the majority, but I aint buying into their crap.