Yes. All people who defend advertising as "providing useful information to customers" are missing the point. I also think they are completely wrong, but even as

Yes. All people who defend advertising as "providing useful information to customers" are missing the point. I also think they are completely wrong, but even assuming the advertising would magically restrict itself to providing true, non-misleading, and useful facts, there is still one issue I have with it... I didn't consent to it. Imagine someone following you on the street, screaming random true facts at you. I would hate it and wish to be left alone. And if someone would defend this practice saying "but, you know, true facts are useful; actully once in a few years I hear a fact that is somehow useful to me", I would be like, yeah, okay, whatever, good for you, but leave me out of it. I prefer not be distracted. Screaming at me on the street is not okay. Sending me spam is not okay. (Please don't explain me how one person in a million might find spam useful. My point is: I don't.) Pushing advertising everywhere is not okay. You will keep doing it anyway (both the spammers and the advertisers) because there is money in it for you, I get it. I still do not consent. No, I don't care that in your opinion, it is actually good for me. In my opinion, it is not, and I prefer my own opinion about my preferences over your adsplaining.