4 ms·

If you have to make up a lot of points to make your argument, maybe you don't have an argument? Ranting about "entitled generation", a supposed contract and sma

by bkor 11y ago

If you have to make up a lot of points to make your argument, maybe you don't have an argument? Ranting about "entitled generation", a supposed contract and small bloggers having a huge hosting bill doesn't do you much good. To top it off, "people like you". Blergh! The problem with ads is that they slow down the internet significantly, various try to trick you to install malware (e.g. on sourceforge), often make sites unusable (big huge banners), affect e.g. clicking on text (I have this habit) and moreover they track you personally. You make it sound "it is just an advertisement" while ignoring all the reasons people block this stuff. It's not about the advertisement; it also includes all the stuff that comes with it! An adblocker makes for way less malware on a machine and a way speedier browser. That's the reason I install it; not because there's some ads. This is _hugely_ different from "ads on TV". Yet even for TV you have Netflix which seems to be pretty popular.

mahranch 11y ago
> If you have to make up a lot of points to make your argument, maybe you don't have an argument? Wow, I thought this was hackernews, where longer, in-depth comments were welcomed, not insulted. And certainly not used against the person. It's like I'm in the youtube comment section... > The problem with ads is that they slow down the internet significantly Irrelevant. Again, without ads, there simply would be no internet at all. You completely underestimate just how much innovation has been the result of ads. Hell, the entire first internet bubble was due to the promise of advertiser money. I suggest you read up a bit on the history of the internet, specifically from 1995-2002. > You make it sound "it is just an advertisement" while ignoring all the reasons people block this stuff. That's because OP didn't mention that in their prior comment. The conversation wasn't about that. Otherwise I would have. It was irrelevant to the direction the conversation was headed. > An adblocker makes for way less malware on a machine and a way speedier browser. That doesn't change the fact that ads fund the internet. As more and more people use ad blockers, you're going to get to a point where you won't need ad blockers anymore. Think about it. :)
- pjc50 11y ago
  read up a bit on the history of the internet, specifically from 1995-2002 I was there. I rememeber it. I also remember that a large amount of it was fundamentally amateur content, produced with no funding at all. I remember when advertising arrived on USENET, and the subsequent attempts to contain it. I remember the collapse of the first internet bubble, because I was made redundant then. It was all predicated on "owning" traffic, that every company thought they would be the one to be the default portal (like CIX or AOL) that steered everyone's purchasing. This was a bad idea then and it's still a bad idea now.

by bkor 11y ago

mahranch 11y ago

> If you have to make up a lot of points to make your argument, maybe you don't have an argument? Wow, I thought this was hackernews, where longer, in-depth comments were welcomed, not insulted. And certainly not used against the person. It's like I'm in the youtube comment section... > The problem with ads is that they slow down the internet significantly Irrelevant. Again, without ads, there simply would be no internet at all. You completely underestimate just how much innovation has been the result of ads. Hell, the entire first internet bubble was due to the promise of advertiser money. I suggest you read up a bit on the history of the internet, specifically from 1995-2002. > You make it sound "it is just an advertisement" while ignoring all the reasons people block this stuff. That's because OP didn't mention that in their prior comment. The conversation wasn't about that. Otherwise I would have. It was irrelevant to the direction the conversation was headed. > An adblocker makes for way less malware on a machine and a way speedier browser. That doesn't change the fact that ads fund the internet. As more and more people use ad blockers, you're going to get to a point where you won't need ad blockers anymore. Think about it. :)

pjc50 11y ago
read up a bit on the history of the internet, specifically from 1995-2002 I was there. I rememeber it. I also remember that a large amount of it was fundamentally amateur content, produced with no funding at all. I remember when advertising arrived on USENET, and the subsequent attempts to contain it. I remember the collapse of the first internet bubble, because I was made redundant then. It was all predicated on "owning" traffic, that every company thought they would be the one to be the default portal (like CIX or AOL) that steered everyone's purchasing. This was a bad idea then and it's still a bad idea now.