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.
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.
(a) worthless shit that nobody would ever click on, except accidentally, or (b) outright scams and malware.
There's also a bunch that are somewhere between merely "worthless" and "malware". I've noticed a lot recently which seem to be targeted toward mobile devices, seeming to intentionally trick people on clicking. For example, I've noticed some which seem to load on a delay, either loading overtop of the page or causing the page to reformat itself when it loads, and loading itself directly when/where you would naturally click to begin scrolling down the page. On a technical level, I don't know what they're doing, but I've found myself more and more accidentally clicking on ads on my phone. Like a page loads, I start reading, and as soon as my thumb hits the screen, an ad appears under my thumb. I'm just trying to scroll, and suddenly it's loading some other page.
I wouldn't have gone looking for an ad-blocker in the first place if it weren't for those kinds of tactics.
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
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.
The problem is that having shit available for others on the internet costs money.
That's not a problem. That's an opportunity.
Your options are a pay-wall or ads.
Your logical fallacy is the "false dichotomy". There's also the begging button, hobby sites, merchandising, product placement, and any number of other means of funding sites. Your lack of imagination does not reflect upon reality, just how far you're going to get in it.
You can get mad about it all you want, but shit isn't free.
I'm not mad, just bored with stupid comments like yours. You're a boring person.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
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.