3 ms·

Cool. Let's put ad-blockers in the UserAgent string so that both parties are approaching the transaction honestly, and see how that pans out.

icebraining 10y ago
You can't invent some new standard for "honest behavior" and then accuse others of dishonesty for not following it. There's nothing dishonest about not informing sites about what addons one is running. We're being just a straightforward as sites are with their information about exactly what PII is captured, by whom and exactly who gets a copy of it and for what purposes it is used. If new standards of reporting are to be expected, then sites - most of which can't even tell who is serving the ads they have on their site - would be screwed. I actually only use adblockers on my tablet, since I have misgivings about the effect of the end of web advertising on the availability of sites to poor people (since ads effectively act as a redistribution mechanism), but I don't blame anyone for not being willing to subject themselves to that crap.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  This isn't a new standard. "Don't take shit you haven't paid for" has been a standard for quite some time. Seriously, at the end of the day, why do you feel entitled to their content, instead of simply not going to their site?
  - icebraining 10y ago
    This is a sponsored comment, please watch this ad before reading it: http://bit.ly/1UbKM9T http://bit.ly/1UbKM9T The new standard was Doctor_Fegg's idea that people should announce in their user-agent that they are using an adblocker. In any case, nothing is being "taken". The entitlement comes from where it has always come from - one makes a request, they reply with whatever they want to serve. Payment is only a moral obligation when we have agreed to do so, otherwise we'd have to pay for every musician playing on the street, regardless of whether we enjoy their content or not. People trying to push moral obligations to prop up their flawed business models don't get my sympathy.

icebraining 10y ago

You can't invent some new standard for "honest behavior" and then accuse others of dishonesty for not following it. There's nothing dishonest about not informing sites about what addons one is running. We're being just a straightforward as sites are with their information about exactly what PII is captured, by whom and exactly who gets a copy of it and for what purposes it is used. If new standards of reporting are to be expected, then sites - most of which can't even tell who is serving the ads they have on their site - would be screwed. I actually only use adblockers on my tablet, since I have misgivings about the effect of the end of web advertising on the availability of sites to poor people (since ads effectively act as a redistribution mechanism), but I don't blame anyone for not being willing to subject themselves to that crap.

st3v3r 10y ago
This isn't a new standard. "Don't take shit you haven't paid for" has been a standard for quite some time. Seriously, at the end of the day, why do you feel entitled to their content, instead of simply not going to their site?
- icebraining 10y ago
  This is a sponsored comment, please watch this ad before reading it: http://bit.ly/1UbKM9T http://bit.ly/1UbKM9T The new standard was Doctor_Fegg's idea that people should announce in their user-agent that they are using an adblocker. In any case, nothing is being "taken". The entitlement comes from where it has always come from - one makes a request, they reply with whatever they want to serve. Payment is only a moral obligation when we have agreed to do so, otherwise we'd have to pay for every musician playing on the street, regardless of whether we enjoy their content or not. People trying to push moral obligations to prop up their flawed business models don't get my sympathy.