4 ms·
Yeah, let them try to detect I'm using adblocker :-) And what will prevent community from developing same thing under different name? -- Edit -- funny to find
by ramtatatam 10y ago
Yeah, let them try to detect I'm using adblocker :-) And what will prevent community from developing same thing under different name?
-- Edit -- funny to find out this bothered somebody enough to down vote. Probably some German bureaucrat unhappy somebody's flagging dead laws before they are pushed through people's throats :-)
- pavel_lishin 10y ago> Yeah, let them try to detect I'm using adblocker Nothing in that translation says that the use of an adblocker is illegal. > And what will prevent community from developing same thing under different name? Nothing. This isn't about whether the adblocker itself is illegal or not; it's 100% about whether creating such a piece of software with a goal to make profit is legitimate or not. From the article: > However, the court does not consider the blockade of advertising in itself anticompetitive, but probably the whitelisting, which operates Eyeo to finance it. As an aside, complaining about downvotes 30 minutes after something is posted is silly. For all we know, the downvotes are automated. Throwing out vague ad hominem attacks against perceived enemies makes you sound goofy. And likely, it's not that your comment bothered anyone, it's just that it's inaccurate and adds nothing to the discussion. </meta>
- bgun 10y agoYou obviously didn't read the article, but the terrible headline is at least partly to blame for this.
- ramtatatam 10y agoWell, I did not - shame on me :-) Though didn't think the title could be that far from actual content.