3 ms·
The trouble is 'unobtrusive ads' don't get the same clicks as the more intrusive ones. And if you're not getting return for your ad spend, you don't keep spendi
by iamben 10y ago
The trouble is 'unobtrusive ads' don't get the same clicks as the more intrusive ones. And if you're not getting return for your ad spend, you don't keep spending (unless you're mental). If a business is (primarily) funded by ads - and the users aren't paying for anything, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to show whatever they like (and to be fair, Facebook are fairly strict with what you can show and relatively good at policing it). If you really hate the ads, you don't have to use the service.
- MOARDONGZPLZ 10y agoBecause it appears that the type of ads that fall under "whatever they like" include malware and processor-intensive ads. Once I could tell that something was wrong because my fan turned on while just browsing the internet. Turned out I had a tab in incognito open and adblock was not enabled for incognito, so the ads on the page were so processor intensive they caused load on my system. That's not an okay thing to do. So, I'll continue to use adblock AND use the services until they dial back their obtrusive ads.
- iamben 10y agoThis isn't the case for Facebook, though. For which this particular argument / post is about.