5 ms·

According to the article it sounds like an optional feature which can be turned off. It allows people who want to support ad-based publishers with quality ads,

According to the article it sounds like an optional feature which can be turned off. It allows people who want to support ad-based publishers with quality ads, while still blocking the heavy junk. Not an unacceptable thing to me, especially if it makes the developer some extra money without forcing me to let the ads through.

Karunamon 11y ago
It's always an "optional feature" - but the app is closed source. Also, given that the blockers don't have the sophistication level that you'd expect from say, µBlock, where you can just click on something annoying and banish it, is that ad being displayed because the ad company is giving backhanders to the developer, or was it just missed in the filter? Who knows? Ad blocking software having "acceptable ads" is identical to antivirus software having "acceptable viruses". Ooh, I just reread the article. The company trying to convince blocking software to do this is the outfit behind the original Adblock Plus, the original people who started this practice.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- yuhong 11y ago
  I don't think ads are the same as viruses. There are different kinds of ads for example, and not all of them use tracking or even pay by the pageview.
  - anonymfus 11y ago
    They are malicious memes. Analogy could be about their effect on brains.
nugget 11y ago
Quality ads like Taboola and Outbrain? It's an extortion scheme to shake down ad networks for money and nothing else. I'm surprised the developer of Crystal was so short sighted, as this increases the chances that someone will make a no-whitelist app that will become more popular and displace him (as uBlock and Adblock are slowly displacing ABP). Not to mention the fact that users are PAYING him to block ads and then he turns around and defeats part of the app's only feature.
- larrywright 11y ago
  Yeah, I was reading this and thinking "This seems reasonable", until I saw Taboola mentioned. Taboola and "One weird trick" ads are the primary reason I want to run an ad blocker in the first place.
mkozlows 11y ago
If Crystal gave an option to "allow high-quality ads" and then that list of high-quality ads was curated carefully in the users' interests, it could make sense. But as soon as people start paying to be included on that list, it's not a list of high-quality ads, it's a list of people that have paid you money that you have decided meet some minimum bar (that you have incentives to keep low).
- jkestner 11y ago
  Yeah, shame - as the leading ad blocker, he could've instead set a de facto standard for respectful ads. Maybe the Deck itself should make this. Make it opt-in, and it's like the micropayments future we were promised.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Karunamon 11y ago

It's always an "optional feature" - but the app is closed source. Also, given that the blockers don't have the sophistication level that you'd expect from say, µBlock, where you can just click on something annoying and banish it, is that ad being displayed because the ad company is giving backhanders to the developer, or was it just missed in the filter? Who knows? Ad blocking software having "acceptable ads" is identical to antivirus software having "acceptable viruses". Ooh, I just reread the article. The company trying to convince blocking software to do this is the outfit behind the original Adblock Plus, the original people who started this practice.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
yuhong 11y ago
I don't think ads are the same as viruses. There are different kinds of ads for example, and not all of them use tracking or even pay by the pageview.
- anonymfus 11y ago
  They are malicious memes. Analogy could be about their effect on brains.

nugget 11y ago

Quality ads like Taboola and Outbrain? It's an extortion scheme to shake down ad networks for money and nothing else. I'm surprised the developer of Crystal was so short sighted, as this increases the chances that someone will make a no-whitelist app that will become more popular and displace him (as uBlock and Adblock are slowly displacing ABP). Not to mention the fact that users are PAYING him to block ads and then he turns around and defeats part of the app's only feature.

larrywright 11y ago
Yeah, I was reading this and thinking "This seems reasonable", until I saw Taboola mentioned. Taboola and "One weird trick" ads are the primary reason I want to run an ad blocker in the first place.

mkozlows 11y ago

If Crystal gave an option to "allow high-quality ads" and then that list of high-quality ads was curated carefully in the users' interests, it could make sense. But as soon as people start paying to be included on that list, it's not a list of high-quality ads, it's a list of people that have paid you money that you have decided meet some minimum bar (that you have incentives to keep low).

jkestner 11y ago
Yeah, shame - as the leading ad blocker, he could've instead set a de facto standard for respectful ads. Maybe the Deck itself should make this. Make it opt-in, and it's like the micropayments future we were promised.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]