← Back to context

Comment by WarmWash

6 hours ago

Trust me, the downvotes were instant.

People really hate it when you hold up a mirror to illustrate a problem. They tend to reflexively punch the mirror

Maybe take a moment to consider why people are choosing to use adblockers in the first place. And whether having content being monetized through and relying on ads is even a good thing overall (it's not). Advertising and marketing is fundamentally a negative for society in most cases.

  • >Maybe take a moment to consider why people are choosing to use adblockers in the first place.

    So they can get content without compensating for it.

    I've been on this train since the beginning. I was there when ad-block-plus read the writing on the wall 15 years ago and decided to make a truce with advertisers. It was clearly unsustainable for 50% of web users to be effectively parasites, so maybe we can negotiate on acceptable ad practices. But to the users, a truce with advertisers!?!? Ublock Origin was born days later.

    • Users do not compensate websites for serving ads. Your argument just doesn't make any sense.

      Also - negotiating 'a truce with advertisers'? What does that even mean? Granting the ads industry even more power and control over the internet?

      Can you come up with an idea that isn't a dystopian hellhole on its face?

      6 replies →

Man, I wish folks calibrated their E(I am actually wrong|downvotes). Have you considered what that value could be in this case?

  • Creators don't get compensation when people ad-block.

    Creators don't get compensation when LLMs scrape.

    It's totally, and completely, unambiguous. The internet just has collective brain damage from the grassroots morals of it being formed 30 years ago by teenagers. How surprising that a bunch of kids decided that the way to save the internet was to make it better for themselves, and worse for the people who make the internet the thing they love.

    Some of us have grown up now, and realize the correct answer to save the internet was to not engage with ad supported content period.

    • > It's totally, and completely, unambiguous. The internet just has collective brain damage

      The point that continues to be missed is that instead of taking downvotes as validation that people simply failed to comprehend the argument you're making (they didn't), you should take them as a check to reevaluate whether your conclusion is as unambiguous as you believe.

      1 reply →

    • There are ways to get paid without ads and you can do on-air reads like I said. adblockers don’t impact them. You also don’t have to play Google and YouTube’s games. I’m sorry folks are caught in that arm’s race between users and Google but Google has made browsing so miserable it’s just reality.

      Adblocking is basic security now. I am not compromising on it. I say this as a “content creator”

      2 replies →

The downvotes are for the unnecessarily aggressive approach, even from people without a major dog in the fight.