4 ms·
I mean, this would be enough to get me to whitelist them in my adblocker. Same goes for any other sites that do the same thing. I feel that's a strong, existing
by _bxg1 6y ago
I mean, this would be enough to get me to whitelist them in my adblocker. Same goes for any other sites that do the same thing. I feel that's a strong, existing incentive.
- chance_state 6y agoProbably not as strong as you think. That's some tiny fraction of people who are willing to whitelist which is another tiny fraction of people who block this stuff to begin with.
- _bxg1 6y agoThe people blocking ads are quite a large fraction at this point. Some smaller publications are shutting down completely because ad revenue has dried up. You may be right about how many people would bother to whitelist just because tracking has been removed, but I bet if they included that fact very prominently in their splash pop-up it would have a noticeable impact. For me, at least, I actively feel guilty reading publications without ads. I don't want journalism to die. But I simply refuse to open myself up to malware and spying for the sake of that ideal. If they want to survive, they need to take responsibility for what they're shoveling into my browser. Otherwise I'll take my basic online safety into my own hands.
- hedora 6y agoIf you white list them, they’re going to generate a tracking profile on you (probably tied to your name and credit card company). Presumably, they’ll directly sell this information to third parties. Even if not, they’ll indirectly share the information. Given that, how many people would actually whitelist them?