Slashdot Mirror
AdBlock Plus Defends Ad Blocking, Applauds Marco Arment
Mark Wilson writes: Ad blockers have been much talked about since Apple opened up support for them in iOS 9. The now infamous Peace shot to the top of the download charts before it was pulled by its creator. Now AdBlock Plus has come out in support of Marco Arment, who developed something of a guilty conscience after his ad blocking creation proved so popular. Ben Williams from AdBlock Plus says "I really applaud this guy," going on to suggest that whitelisting and the Acceptable Ads feature of AdBlock Plus epitomize the "more nuanced, complex approach" Arment called for. The ad blocking software I'd like to see would detect and zap into a heap of ash those unrelated-photo clickbait ads; I'd rather suffer through some honest banner ads anytime.
Support of his capitulation to the status quo by pulling his app? Support for him clearing the market of a successful ad-blocker so they have fewer competitors?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I use Ghostery because I think all ads are also tracker bots like Google Analytics, Facebook like buttons, etc. Even if you never use Google or Facebook they know almost every webpage you visit because most have Google Analytics or Facebook like buttons that load JavaScript from their servers.
Well behaved ads are not an issue.
And that's the real problem that the AdBlock haters don't want to admit.
More and more pages crammed full of more and more annoying, distracting ads that are either (a) worthless shit that nobody would ever click on, except accidentally, or (b) outright scams and malware.
Clean up your shit and adblocking goes away.
Clean up your shit and adblocking goes away.
Adblocking would never have become a thing if they had stuck to image only banner ads and such and never introduced 'punch the monkey' type ads.
I don't read AC A human right
Otherwise I block every ad and I sleep like a baby for it. I don't have a lot of power in this fucking society, if I can't even control where my attention goes to, then what the fuck can I control?
I decide what I want downloaded, because I pay for it and I fucking hate ads and that is why I use ad blocking software. If I want to buy something, then and only then will I look at some ads (maybe). If you want to run a business web site or your own web site then you pay for it. If you don't like me looking at your web site, fine I will go somewhere else, just don't expect me to look at ads.
The recent slashdot poll about ads said it all, 65% use ad blocking software and do not feel guilty about doing so.
Regards
Slashgotgirl
The more I know, the less I know
AdBlock Plus Defends Ad Blocking, Applauds Marco Arment
Try Adlblock Plus fellates self, applauds Marco Arment for fellating advertisers. Because of course AdBlock Plus would applaud Marco Arment for doing precisely what they do, and permitting some advertising content. But in the process, they're doing nothing but patting themselves on the backs... or as we often like to say these days, sucking their own dicks.
There is no "acceptable advertising", to many of us. We're tired of space in our brain being rented out, and we're willing to not consume content if only we don't have to encounter advertisements. I'd rather my ad blocker break a site than show me ads. Otherwise, I know not to go back there, and may that site die the death of a thousand dogs, amen. This is a war for control of your brain. Don't be a loser.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you have a valuable commodity then somebody will voluntarily support it. Wikipedia for example. Or you might find people want to buy what you have on offer. When I see people without ad-blockers I'm amazed at their crap experience, but they don't seem to know any better. If you want to see model this in print then buy Private Eye. Excellent Journalism worth paying for and ads at front and back which I skip over because I've got no money to spend, but presumably some people do because a lot are repeats.
Adblocking would never have become a thing if they had stuck to image only banner ads and such and never introduced 'punch the monkey' type ads.
I think ad-delivered malware probably plays a role too.
If the ad market policed itself, ad-blockers would not be necessary.
Since they are necessary, and since the "more nuanced, complex approach" is expensive and error-prone, rightly self-interested end-users have no choice but to resort to simple, effective, indiscriminate ad-blockers.
That is all.
How could he? His principle objection was that he did not want to become the gatekeeper of what was a "good ad" and what was a "bad ad".
He closed his app because he was unwilling to take responsibility for such a decision, yet was not comfortable with eliminating the revenue stream of all sites, regardless of their ad policies.