30 ms·
While I also use an ad blocker, it seems odd to be upset that they block you from viewing their site. You've (we've) decided that you (we) don't want their ads.
by tghw 11y ago
While I also use an ad blocker, it seems odd to be upset that they block you from viewing their site. You've (we've) decided that you (we) don't want their ads. They've decided they don't want readers who don't take their ads.
Seems fair.
- cgriswald 11y agoI've reread the GP post several times and I am only seeing a stated fact, not evidence of any specific emotion. The GP might be upset, but his post is sparse enough that his point isn't really clear. While the post doesn't add much to the discussion, neither does a non sequitur about fairness or using pronouns in weird, parenthetical ways. But I find some value in the GP post. It tells us that Wired is taking an active stance against ad blockers. This information can be used when considering sources for submission or deciding whether to click a link. Many of the responses to the GP provide value as well by shedding light on which ad blockers are more effective and/or are triggering the issue.
- charonn0 11y agoWhat is "GP"?
- predakanga 11y agoGrandparent - the comment two posts up
- tobltobs 11y agoProblem is: There a thousands of comments like this on HN. They do not have any entropy anymore. It is just an expression of being upset for this "discrimination".
- simoncion 11y agoThing is, Wired's ad-blocking door slam appears to be triggered by Firefox's anti-tracking protections built into its Privacy Browsing mode. So, this is a really shitty false positive for Wired's system.
- taneq 11y agoOr are their tracking bugs providing enough of a revenue stream that their real issue is with not being able to track you?