4 ms·

Im going to be frank. I block ads, and will not start paying for content. I have had an advertising free web for a long time and will not: a) accept ads b) pay

Im going to be frank. I block ads, and will not start paying for content. I have had an advertising free web for a long time and will not: a) accept ads b) pay for content What will you do for people like me?

magic5227 10y ago
How long do you expect that to be sustainable?
- 45h34jh53k4j 10y ago
  frankly; dont care. not my problem, i am a consumer. its been sustainable for the last 20 years. the same 'sustainability' arguments were made 10 years ago, yet here we are.
  - paulryanrogers 10y ago
    We are in a different place today; arguably worse. And if everyone ad-blocking is not sustainable then there will be less for you to consume.
    - 45h34jh53k4j 10y ago
      I appreciate that and it makes sense from a business perspective. However, many many people outside SV (which is most of the planet) have the same views as myself and will happily 'steal' content. Attempts like DRM are trying to solve the wrong problem. Rather than trying to shoehorn these 'user pays' models as an alternative to 'advertiser pays', we need a totally new paradigm. Invent it pls SV
    - CaptSpify 10y ago
      The only reason it's worse is that we've let advertisers keep winning. There's more money in advertising on the web now than there was 20 years ago. If there was no money in it, they'd have gone away and things would be better.
  - SamBam 10y ago
    It is your problem when more and more companies start implementing hard-to-get-around "Pay a subscription or unblock ads" walls. If I don't want to see ads from, e.g. NY Times, but I want to read their content, I could either manage yet-another-subscription, or I could have a plugin that manages the payment for me. The benefit of the latter is (in theory) a) I don't need to have yet-another-subscription, and b) I don't pay for what I don't read. The downside is, again, that I don't pay for what I don't read, which in turn leads to click-bait and listicles. However, advertising has already led to that.
CaptSpify 10y ago
I'm with you, in that I rarely see anything worth paying for. https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/AdSupportedWebDeathView https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/AdSupportedWebD... > essentially all of the ad supported sites I visit are diversions The internet existed and was great before ads, it'll exist and be great if ads die off.
intrasight 10y ago
I also block ads. But I also purchase several periodic publications - some print, some digital, none web-based. When I'm browsing the internet, I really think that I'm wasting my time since I already pay for and therefore have quality news content. I assume that many, like me, are browsing rather than working because we have focus issues. So here's another business model for someone to pursue. Rather than ad-block, let's have site-block but where that site that got blocked still receives a micro-payment from me. Why, you ask, would I want to pay a site that I didn't visit? Because I made an extra $20 that hour by not wasting time on the site, and I'm happy to give them $1 or 5% of those extra earnings. The fact that I'm somewhat serious here show you what a crazy game we've made for ourselves.

magic5227 10y ago

How long do you expect that to be sustainable?

45h34jh53k4j 10y ago
frankly; dont care. not my problem, i am a consumer. its been sustainable for the last 20 years. the same 'sustainability' arguments were made 10 years ago, yet here we are.
- paulryanrogers 10y ago
  We are in a different place today; arguably worse. And if everyone ad-blocking is not sustainable then there will be less for you to consume.
  - 45h34jh53k4j 10y ago
    I appreciate that and it makes sense from a business perspective. However, many many people outside SV (which is most of the planet) have the same views as myself and will happily 'steal' content. Attempts like DRM are trying to solve the wrong problem. Rather than trying to shoehorn these 'user pays' models as an alternative to 'advertiser pays', we need a totally new paradigm. Invent it pls SV
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    The only reason it's worse is that we've let advertisers keep winning. There's more money in advertising on the web now than there was 20 years ago. If there was no money in it, they'd have gone away and things would be better.
- SamBam 10y ago
  It is your problem when more and more companies start implementing hard-to-get-around "Pay a subscription or unblock ads" walls. If I don't want to see ads from, e.g. NY Times, but I want to read their content, I could either manage yet-another-subscription, or I could have a plugin that manages the payment for me. The benefit of the latter is (in theory) a) I don't need to have yet-another-subscription, and b) I don't pay for what I don't read. The downside is, again, that I don't pay for what I don't read, which in turn leads to click-bait and listicles. However, advertising has already led to that.

CaptSpify 10y ago

I'm with you, in that I rarely see anything worth paying for. https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/AdSupportedWebDeathView https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/web/AdSupportedWebD... > essentially all of the ad supported sites I visit are diversions The internet existed and was great before ads, it'll exist and be great if ads die off.

intrasight 10y ago

I also block ads. But I also purchase several periodic publications - some print, some digital, none web-based. When I'm browsing the internet, I really think that I'm wasting my time since I already pay for and therefore have quality news content. I assume that many, like me, are browsing rather than working because we have focus issues. So here's another business model for someone to pursue. Rather than ad-block, let's have site-block but where that site that got blocked still receives a micro-payment from me. Why, you ask, would I want to pay a site that I didn't visit? Because I made an extra $20 that hour by not wasting time on the site, and I'm happy to give them $1 or 5% of those extra earnings. The fact that I'm somewhat serious here show you what a crazy game we've made for ourselves.