5 ms·
It does seem similar. If you don't want to see the ads, don't use the service. I don't use an ad blocker, and if I don't want to see ads I pay for the service,
by aaronax 7y ago
It does seem similar. If you don't want to see the ads, don't use the service.
I don't use an ad blocker, and if I don't want to see ads I pay for the service, such as with Reddit, Ars Technica, Windows Live Mail, Netflix, and YouTube. Technically, I quit Netflix once they started showing me ads, even though they were for their own shows (general dark patterns were the more significant factor though).
- CathedralBorrow 7y agoWhere do you draw that line though? If I take steps to ignore/block ads that don't involve software -- like muting during ads or flipping the phone over -- am I subverting the company's revenue model? How much do I need to "see" ads?
- keithnoizu 7y agoRight. It's like the slow march towards the future from the fifteen million merits episode of black mirror.
- aaronax 7y agoA very good question. Muting a TV seems OK on the surface to me, but only because it is normal to me. When actually thinking about it, I realize that muting TV ads is similar to web ad blocking. So in principle I would have to say that one shouldn't mute TV ads, or skip them using +10 second buttons. Of course I will not always live my life up to that principle...
- anoncake 7y ago> It does seem similar. If you don't want to see the ads, don't use the service. That just doesn't make sense. Not using their services has zero advantages compared to blocking ads. But by using them, you raise their costs, making their business model less viable. > I don't use an ad blocker, and if I don't want to see ads I pay for the service, such as with Reddit, Ars Technica, Windows Live Mail, Netflix, and YouTube. By paying for services, you show that you have disposable income. You cannot escape ads that way except in the short term.