Comment by bitpush
8 hours ago
The right analogy would be a newspaper delivering you the paper in ~milliseconds when you ask for it, whereever in the world, for free, and then you proceed to rip off the ads and read it.
The reason newspaper do the delivery was the promise that you'll see the ads, and they get to make money from that ads.
If they notice that you do all of the work of providing you the newspaper almost instantly and you dont see the ads, they are either gonna have to a) politely refuse to serve you b) point you to an alternate way of accessing the newspaper ("Newspaper Premium" for $$)
Firstly, ad watch time is not currency.
Second once the paper's in my hands, I get to do what I want with it, and the expectations of the paper company has no bearing on it.
If they don't want to give me the paper for free, they should stop, but they haven't yet. Their expectation to make a certain amount of revenue from ads doesn't obligate the consumer. If their business model isn't making them the profit they need, it's on them to change their strategy.
> Second once the paper's in my hands, I get to do what I want with it, and the expectations of the paper company has no bearing on it.
Absolutely! I run an adblocker as well!
At the same time, you'd agree they have the right to refuse to serve you (access denied) or make you jump through hoops (solve a challenge etc)
Sure. YouTube can put everything behind a paywall one day and I won't complain. But I reject the increasingly common belief that it's somehow wrong to block ads.
1 reply →