6 ms·

I am also not a fan of annoying ads and maybe I am just a crotchety old guy, but, IMO, using an Ad Blocker and viewing content is theft. If one is concerned wi

I am also not a fan of annoying ads and maybe I am just a crotchety old guy, but, IMO, using an Ad Blocker and viewing content is theft. If one is concerned with privacy, there are alternative measures such as cookie blocking options, legislation, etc. If the ad formats are annoying then the right thing to do is to let the publisher know and work out a way to pay for the content ad-free or just stop using the site. I also feel the same way about the bit-torrents and downloading copyrighted content. But, maybe I am the only one who feels this way.

DanBC 11y ago
I mostly agree with you. But on a metered Internet connection the ads can increase cost. That's pretty lousy - I pay to get this extra content that I don't want, in order to provide minimal payment to the content creator. Some movie studios realised that one thing driving torrent downloads was the fragility of DVDs / BluRays in the hands of children, and people wanted backups. So they started offering electronic downloads for people who bought the disc, or free disc replacements.
BogusIKnow 11y ago
I don't agree. If I get a magazine which is mostly not financed by my payment but the ads, and rip out all ads and throw them away, or throw the ad supplements away and not read them, is it theft? If it is theft blocking (aka not reading) ads online, is it theft if I just don't read them? And I don't want to argue, just interested, where is the difference in not reading them and blocking them? Is it morally imperative to read all ads in a magazine? So I came to the conclusion, because I throw away ad supplement of magazines right away and don't read ads in magazines, me ad blocking can't be theft either, or not reading ads in magazines is theft too. PS: Because you bringing up bit torrent implying people who ad block are also downloading films, well, I'm not.
- nwhitmore 11y ago
  So, if it is ok for you to view content while denying the content producers the ability to monetize that content, then would you also agree it is ok to take content from behind a paywall and display it for free on your site? If not, what is it specifically that makes the first ok but not the other?
  - RUG3Y 11y ago
    No one is denying content providers the right to monetize by blocking ads. The onus is on them to find a business model that the market will support.
- BogusIKnow 11y ago
  @nwhitmore: No. I'm not proposing circumventing copyright measures. But I do not read ads a website presents. I would not steal a magazine form a news stand or break a lock to get a magazine. But I throw away ad supplements before I read anything in a magazine.
jwmerrill 11y ago
> using an Ad Blocker and viewing content is theft. Here's a different POV. Using an ad blocker is not theft: it's a negotiation. When I click on a link to your site from a site like HN, I have not implicitly agreed to whatever terms you would like to impose on me. I can't even really know them ahead of time. Instead, I'm sending my User Agent to negotiate fetching some resources. If I decline to fetch your ads, you can feel free to decline to serve me your content. Or you can give the content to me anyway. Your choice.
- nwhitmore 11y ago
  Really? What header does your browser send to my server informing me that you are blocking ads so that I know to deny you my content?
  - BogusIKnow 11y ago
    X-Advertisements: None
    - nwhitmore 11y ago
      Which ad blockers provide for that header being sent? I've never seen it before and I can't find any information on it. Did you just make it up?
      - BogusIKnow 11y ago
        My answer was to your question: "What header does your browser send to my server informing me that you are blocking ads so that I know to deny you my content?" 1. "Did you just make it up?" -> No. 2. "Which ad blockers provide for that header being sent?" -> Use a plugin in Firefox to set custom headers 3. Do website honor my header? -> Not yet.
  - jwmerrill 11y ago
    Response 1: whether this question already has a technical answer that you find satisfying does not affect whether using an ad blocker is theft. Response 2: a few sites are already popping up messages asking you to turn off your ad blocker, which is at least a partial existence proof. Response 3: if you want to know whether I got your ads, use cookies or make the request url unique to me, and then check that your ad servers served the appropriate requests before allowing your content servers to serve me content. But seriously, I shouldn't be required to solve all these problems for you as a user in order to not be called a thief. If you want a more explicit contract, then require a log in. If that adds too much friction, invent a better a better solution. *Edited to remove the inflammatory suggestion to go out of business if you refuse to negotiate.
RUG3Y 11y ago
In no way is blocking ads theft. The ads are using your bandwidth.

DanBC 11y ago

I mostly agree with you. But on a metered Internet connection the ads can increase cost. That's pretty lousy - I pay to get this extra content that I don't want, in order to provide minimal payment to the content creator. Some movie studios realised that one thing driving torrent downloads was the fragility of DVDs / BluRays in the hands of children, and people wanted backups. So they started offering electronic downloads for people who bought the disc, or free disc replacements.

BogusIKnow 11y ago

I don't agree. If I get a magazine which is mostly not financed by my payment but the ads, and rip out all ads and throw them away, or throw the ad supplements away and not read them, is it theft? If it is theft blocking (aka not reading) ads online, is it theft if I just don't read them? And I don't want to argue, just interested, where is the difference in not reading them and blocking them? Is it morally imperative to read all ads in a magazine? So I came to the conclusion, because I throw away ad supplement of magazines right away and don't read ads in magazines, me ad blocking can't be theft either, or not reading ads in magazines is theft too. PS: Because you bringing up bit torrent implying people who ad block are also downloading films, well, I'm not.

nwhitmore 11y ago
So, if it is ok for you to view content while denying the content producers the ability to monetize that content, then would you also agree it is ok to take content from behind a paywall and display it for free on your site? If not, what is it specifically that makes the first ok but not the other?
- RUG3Y 11y ago
  No one is denying content providers the right to monetize by blocking ads. The onus is on them to find a business model that the market will support.
BogusIKnow 11y ago
@nwhitmore: No. I'm not proposing circumventing copyright measures. But I do not read ads a website presents. I would not steal a magazine form a news stand or break a lock to get a magazine. But I throw away ad supplements before I read anything in a magazine.

jwmerrill 11y ago

> using an Ad Blocker and viewing content is theft. Here's a different POV. Using an ad blocker is not theft: it's a negotiation. When I click on a link to your site from a site like HN, I have not implicitly agreed to whatever terms you would like to impose on me. I can't even really know them ahead of time. Instead, I'm sending my User Agent to negotiate fetching some resources. If I decline to fetch your ads, you can feel free to decline to serve me your content. Or you can give the content to me anyway. Your choice.

nwhitmore 11y ago
Really? What header does your browser send to my server informing me that you are blocking ads so that I know to deny you my content?
- BogusIKnow 11y ago
  X-Advertisements: None
  - nwhitmore 11y ago
    Which ad blockers provide for that header being sent? I've never seen it before and I can't find any information on it. Did you just make it up?
    - BogusIKnow 11y ago
      My answer was to your question: "What header does your browser send to my server informing me that you are blocking ads so that I know to deny you my content?" 1. "Did you just make it up?" -> No. 2. "Which ad blockers provide for that header being sent?" -> Use a plugin in Firefox to set custom headers 3. Do website honor my header? -> Not yet.
- jwmerrill 11y ago
  Response 1: whether this question already has a technical answer that you find satisfying does not affect whether using an ad blocker is theft. Response 2: a few sites are already popping up messages asking you to turn off your ad blocker, which is at least a partial existence proof. Response 3: if you want to know whether I got your ads, use cookies or make the request url unique to me, and then check that your ad servers served the appropriate requests before allowing your content servers to serve me content. But seriously, I shouldn't be required to solve all these problems for you as a user in order to not be called a thief. If you want a more explicit contract, then require a log in. If that adds too much friction, invent a better a better solution. *Edited to remove the inflammatory suggestion to go out of business if you refuse to negotiate.

RUG3Y 11y ago

In no way is blocking ads theft. The ads are using your bandwidth.