3 ms·

> That additional friction doesn't improve my user experience, it improves someone else's. Mandating that would turn Google into a splash screen or landing page

> That additional friction doesn't improve my user experience, it improves someone else's. Mandating that would turn Google into a splash screen or landing page, and we've gotten rid of those anti patterns for good reasons. Long-term (potentially): those sites no longer exist, so there's no way to learn the information with or without a click.

gumby 7y ago
That's the argument against ad blockers, and they seem reasonably popular, and accepted.
- nixpulvis 7y ago
  Have you not seen the problems that have popped up due to the ad blocking arms race?
  - gumby 7y ago
    Not sure. I've seen complaints by some advertising sites, but no especial problems. Can you elaborate? I'd genuinely like to know more.
    - nixpulvis 7y ago
      Well I've hit websites that break completely with ad blockers enabled. I've also seen sites that break regardless of my addons, just because it's Firefox, and it thinks I've installed something that's blocking ads specifically (frankly it's offensive to tell the user to disable something they never enabled, while blocking them). Meanwhile, I waste my own time looking at how these are implemented because in about half the cases (or so) I can simply "inspect element" and delete the offending code. Though I waste the time in the other cases. It's a disgrace, and something we shouldn't stand for...
- stordoff 7y ago
  I agree, but there are two differences IMO: * Ads have tracking and security implications. For clicking though to a site, that is far less the case (an individual site can't correlate my visits across multiple sites, whereas an ad network can). * Going to the site at least gives an opportunity to present alternative monetisation strategies (direct payment or donations, or selling additional content/services - depending on the nature of the site). If you are just getting the information from the Google page, that disappears.

gumby 7y ago

That's the argument against ad blockers, and they seem reasonably popular, and accepted.

nixpulvis 7y ago
Have you not seen the problems that have popped up due to the ad blocking arms race?
- gumby 7y ago
  Not sure. I've seen complaints by some advertising sites, but no especial problems. Can you elaborate? I'd genuinely like to know more.
  - nixpulvis 7y ago
    Well I've hit websites that break completely with ad blockers enabled. I've also seen sites that break regardless of my addons, just because it's Firefox, and it thinks I've installed something that's blocking ads specifically (frankly it's offensive to tell the user to disable something they never enabled, while blocking them). Meanwhile, I waste my own time looking at how these are implemented because in about half the cases (or so) I can simply "inspect element" and delete the offending code. Though I waste the time in the other cases. It's a disgrace, and something we shouldn't stand for...
stordoff 7y ago
I agree, but there are two differences IMO: * Ads have tracking and security implications. For clicking though to a site, that is far less the case (an individual site can't correlate my visits across multiple sites, whereas an ad network can). * Going to the site at least gives an opportunity to present alternative monetisation strategies (direct payment or donations, or selling additional content/services - depending on the nature of the site). If you are just getting the information from the Google page, that disappears.