9 ms·

You set the price when you consume the content that you know is funded with ads. It is your attention which you are agreeing to trade for information or entert

You set the price when you consume the content that you know is funded with ads. It is your attention which you are agreeing to trade for information or entertainment. >They're welcome to block me from their websites, if they feel that's not acceptable. This is more commonly happening now. Then we all have to deal with people complaining about that. Taking up /my/ attention which they are refusing to pay for. Pay me for reading your posts.

Sir_Substance 10y ago
>You set the price when you consume the content that you know is funded with ads. You're objectively wrong. If that were the case, I would be blocked from accessing the content without "paying the price". The situation is instead clearly analogous to a "pay what you feel it is worth" model. The creators of the content allow anyone to view it, regardless of whether they run an ad blocker or not. Sometimes, they place alternative content where the ads would be, requesting that I disable my ad blocker, or like them on facebook as an alternative. I think the "recommended price" of this "pay what you feel it is worth" model, which is usually watching advertising and allowing myself to be tracked, is too high. I have once or twice directly sent the creator $5-10, when they offered a payment method that didn't require a paypal account. If it's good content, that's pretty reasonable. Dans Data[1] /is/ good content, even if it's getting a bit dated these days. [1] http://www.dansdata.com http://www.dansdata.com
- sanswork 10y ago
  Content creators have gone with not blocking blockers up until now because it's not an issue. As it becomes more of an issue you start seeing more and more anti-blocking scripts. Once or twice in all your years online you have agreed to an alternate funding method and you think that is sustainable for content creators? You can make a lot of arguments for ad blocking. I ad block because it slows my computer down. Making the claim that you ad block because your attention is more valuable though is a joke.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    > Making the claim that you ad block because your attention is more valuable though is a joke. It's not a joke. It's avoiding death by thousand cuts. Time is literally the most valuable commodity we have. Anything you do to waste someone's time - like displaying obtrusive, annoying ads - is in my books an act of aggression.
    - sanswork 10y ago
      If your time is so important why are you wasting it visiting pages with ads? >There's enough better content available for free and without ads Surely you'd just stick with the better content that doesn't use ads all the time right?
      - TeMPOraL 10y ago
        > If your time is so important why are you wasting it visiting pages with ads? Because I get linked to them. Also, social objects - other people are visiting those pages, so I have to check them out too in order to participate in the conversation. Also, YouTube. > Surely you'd just stick with the better content that doesn't use ads all the time right? Yeah, and I mostly do.
        sanswork 10y ago
        So you just follow random links people send you? That seems like a horrible waste of your most precious commodity. YouTube offers a way to pay for an ad free experience. Are you a paying member?
        TeMPOraL 10y ago
        > So you just follow random links people send you? That seems like a horrible waste of your most precious commodity. See my point about social objects. > YouTube offers a way to pay for an ad free experience. Are you a paying member? They don't offer it in my country, so no. But I do am a paying subscriber of Netflix, Spotify and Amazon Prime Video, FWIW.
- dispose13432 10y ago
  >The creators of the content allow anyone to view it, regardless of whether they run an ad blocker or not. Sometimes, they place alternative content where the ads would be, requesting that I disable my ad blocker, or like them on facebook as an alternative. So would you suggest (or would you even use) AdBlockers identify themselves to the website (so I can write "if($_SERVER["AdBlocker]){echo "Sorry, see ads or leave}"? Because there are adblock blockers, and people write _adblock-blocker-blockers_.
  - sintaxi 10y ago
    No need. Every web request implicitly has that header set already. Its completely within the content providers power to deny me content with that understood. When you buy a magazine from Starbucks do you tell the clerk what part of the magazine you intend to read what what you intend to ignore? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. The clerk & publishers are well aware I may ignore or even rip out any or all of the magazine pages and the magazine is priced accordingly.
  - imagist 10y ago
    There are already websites that detect my ad blocker and request that I turn on ads or leave, usually in condescending language, but I do leave.
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  FWIW paying someone with PayPal doesn't require you to have an account, you can pay direct with a credit/debit card.
belorn 10y ago
My country also set down some laws which those advertisement network ignores. They broke the deal for which those law represent, and they get to live in the wild west for which they chosen. Give me a advertisement network which takes legal liability for what they advertise and follows local law, and we could start talking about what implicit deal exist when I visit a website. This mean no recording (data protection laws), no malware (anti-hacking laws), fair representation of the product, clear pricing, no alcohol, tobacco or advertisement towards minors, clear indication that its an advertisement, and the other rules that exist in advertisement laws here in Sweden. Tax laws involved are also always involved If there is a deal where service is provided in exchange for goods.
imagist 10y ago
> You set the price when you consume the content that you know is funded with ads. How do I know this without viewing ads that I don't agree to view? > It is your attention which you are agreeing to trade for information or entertainment. The ego required to tell people who are explicitly not agreeing to your terms that they are implicitly agreeing to your terms is appalling. Surely we can believe people when they tell us what they agree to. > This is more commonly happening now. Then we all have to deal with people complaining about that. Taking up /my/ attention which they are refusing to pay for. Pay me for reading your posts. You loaded this hacker news page with the intent of reading other users' posts. I've never once loaded a page with the intent of viewing an ad. If you don't want to view my posts, I'd be entirely fine with you writing a browser plugin that strips my posts from your page. Consume the content you want to consume, that's your prerogative.

Sir_Substance 10y ago

>You set the price when you consume the content that you know is funded with ads. You're objectively wrong. If that were the case, I would be blocked from accessing the content without "paying the price". The situation is instead clearly analogous to a "pay what you feel it is worth" model. The creators of the content allow anyone to view it, regardless of whether they run an ad blocker or not. Sometimes, they place alternative content where the ads would be, requesting that I disable my ad blocker, or like them on facebook as an alternative. I think the "recommended price" of this "pay what you feel it is worth" model, which is usually watching advertising and allowing myself to be tracked, is too high. I have once or twice directly sent the creator $5-10, when they offered a payment method that didn't require a paypal account. If it's good content, that's pretty reasonable. Dans Data[1] /is/ good content, even if it's getting a bit dated these days. [1] http://www.dansdata.com http://www.dansdata.com

sanswork 10y ago
Content creators have gone with not blocking blockers up until now because it's not an issue. As it becomes more of an issue you start seeing more and more anti-blocking scripts. Once or twice in all your years online you have agreed to an alternate funding method and you think that is sustainable for content creators? You can make a lot of arguments for ad blocking. I ad block because it slows my computer down. Making the claim that you ad block because your attention is more valuable though is a joke.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  > Making the claim that you ad block because your attention is more valuable though is a joke. It's not a joke. It's avoiding death by thousand cuts. Time is literally the most valuable commodity we have. Anything you do to waste someone's time - like displaying obtrusive, annoying ads - is in my books an act of aggression.
  - sanswork 10y ago
    If your time is so important why are you wasting it visiting pages with ads? >There's enough better content available for free and without ads Surely you'd just stick with the better content that doesn't use ads all the time right?
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      > If your time is so important why are you wasting it visiting pages with ads? Because I get linked to them. Also, social objects - other people are visiting those pages, so I have to check them out too in order to participate in the conversation. Also, YouTube. > Surely you'd just stick with the better content that doesn't use ads all the time right? Yeah, and I mostly do.
      - sanswork 10y ago
        So you just follow random links people send you? That seems like a horrible waste of your most precious commodity. YouTube offers a way to pay for an ad free experience. Are you a paying member?
        TeMPOraL 10y ago
        > So you just follow random links people send you? That seems like a horrible waste of your most precious commodity. See my point about social objects. > YouTube offers a way to pay for an ad free experience. Are you a paying member? They don't offer it in my country, so no. But I do am a paying subscriber of Netflix, Spotify and Amazon Prime Video, FWIW.
dispose13432 10y ago
>The creators of the content allow anyone to view it, regardless of whether they run an ad blocker or not. Sometimes, they place alternative content where the ads would be, requesting that I disable my ad blocker, or like them on facebook as an alternative. So would you suggest (or would you even use) AdBlockers identify themselves to the website (so I can write "if($_SERVER["AdBlocker]){echo "Sorry, see ads or leave}"? Because there are adblock blockers, and people write _adblock-blocker-blockers_.
- sintaxi 10y ago
  No need. Every web request implicitly has that header set already. Its completely within the content providers power to deny me content with that understood. When you buy a magazine from Starbucks do you tell the clerk what part of the magazine you intend to read what what you intend to ignore? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. The clerk & publishers are well aware I may ignore or even rip out any or all of the magazine pages and the magazine is priced accordingly.
- imagist 10y ago
  There are already websites that detect my ad blocker and request that I turn on ads or leave, usually in condescending language, but I do leave.
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
FWIW paying someone with PayPal doesn't require you to have an account, you can pay direct with a credit/debit card.

belorn 10y ago

My country also set down some laws which those advertisement network ignores. They broke the deal for which those law represent, and they get to live in the wild west for which they chosen. Give me a advertisement network which takes legal liability for what they advertise and follows local law, and we could start talking about what implicit deal exist when I visit a website. This mean no recording (data protection laws), no malware (anti-hacking laws), fair representation of the product, clear pricing, no alcohol, tobacco or advertisement towards minors, clear indication that its an advertisement, and the other rules that exist in advertisement laws here in Sweden. Tax laws involved are also always involved If there is a deal where service is provided in exchange for goods.

imagist 10y ago

> You set the price when you consume the content that you know is funded with ads. How do I know this without viewing ads that I don't agree to view? > It is your attention which you are agreeing to trade for information or entertainment. The ego required to tell people who are explicitly not agreeing to your terms that they are implicitly agreeing to your terms is appalling. Surely we can believe people when they tell us what they agree to. > This is more commonly happening now. Then we all have to deal with people complaining about that. Taking up /my/ attention which they are refusing to pay for. Pay me for reading your posts. You loaded this hacker news page with the intent of reading other users' posts. I've never once loaded a page with the intent of viewing an ad. If you don't want to view my posts, I'd be entirely fine with you writing a browser plugin that strips my posts from your page. Consume the content you want to consume, that's your prerogative.