3 ms·
i read the link only in part, but this look reasonable. if you exclude ads and paywall how should they make money? moreover when mozzilla made attempt to "non-
by kiriakasis 9y ago
i read the link only in part, but this look reasonable.
if you exclude ads and paywall how should they make money?
moreover when mozzilla made attempt to "non-tracking privacy-respectful ads" in the mr robot scandal everyone was at their throat.
how should site make money then?
- bzbarsky 9y agoIf you don't see the issue with Google enabling putting up paywalls, but only on sites that are showing ads that belong to them or to companies that made a deal with them, while blocking ads on sites that don't do Google's bidding, I'm not sure what to tell you. Note that they are not being public with their list of sites that they will block ads on and reason why; nothing prevents them from putting sites on that list for any arbitrary reason they want.
- TheAceOfHearts 9y agoI use uBlock Origin, but it's pretty easy to bypass: host ads on your own site. That's how ads worked in other forms of media for ages. How about providing a meaningful service and request adequate compensation? Paywalls work fine for quality content. There's tons of proof that people are willing to pay for books, games, movies, and music. But by having a paywall, you lose out on search indexing. You can't have your cake and eat it.
- Zarel 9y agoHosting ads on your site isn't actually enough. uBlock Origin can and does block by CSS selector (and that's the default behavior if you use right-click -> Block Element). It _does_ get pretty hard to block if your ads are bespoke native advertisements, though.