4 ms·
I 100% agree with this: "But there's a downside to this content blocking: it's hurting many smaller sites that rely on advertising to keep the lights on. More
by robbrown451 8y ago
I 100% agree with this:
"But there's a downside to this content blocking: it's hurting many smaller sites that rely on advertising to keep the lights on. More and more of these sites are pleading to disable content blockers"
The solution proposed is unworkable for all the reasons others propose. But there really is a baby/bathwater situation with ad blockers that attempt to kill all advertisements.
I don't know what the solution is, but I think it is an important problem and deserving of a more sophisticated solution than ad blockers or ones like the solution proposed. People here are smart, I hope people can do more than just state reasons why we can't do better than what we are doing.
- burkaman 8y agoMost people block ads because they don't want to see ads, not because they want less javascript. The solution is to find a better business model, not make smaller ads.
- robbrown451 8y agoI think it is a small subset of people that see things that black and white. I agree it is not simply "wanting less javascript", but I think a large number of people would not mind small ads that have minimal bandwidth requirements, minimal cpu usage, minimal slowing down the page, that don't pop up in your face, are not visually distracting, and are relevant to the material on the site. I don't think "get a different business model" is a reasonable option for many web sites, unless the whole point of the site is to support a product (for instance Adobe's Photoshop web page, or whatever).
- bostik 8y agoLong, long time ago I wrote down my set of rules for acceptable ads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10521930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10521930 Really, we block ads because they are intrusive, disruptive, invasive and bloated pieces of malware. Simple as that.