4 ms·

Adblockers stop sites from making money from those third-party ads. They obviously don't stop a shopping site from selling products or from GitLab.com register

Adblockers stop sites from making money from those third-party ads. They obviously don't stop a shopping site from selling products or from GitLab.com registering users for GitLab services etc. If the way a site makes money is by abusing the visitors, adblockers stop the abuse and the money from that* side of things, which may be all the income they get, but not necessarily. So, this is not a simple yes/no situation.

mharroun 6y ago
So they need a set bushiness and tech teams to build an internal ad stack, and try to get advertisers... many who wont buy in without 3rd party tracking to mitigate fraud.
- notriddle 6y ago
  > So they need a set bushiness and tech teams to build an internal ad stack Somebody needs to take responsibility for the malicious and broken ads. I really don't care who does it; you can contract it out, or do it internally, just as long as the work actually gets done. The work isn't getting done, right now.
- quadrangle 6y ago
  There's better and worse in advertising, sure. But third-party ads are a compromised business model even at their best. I'm not saying businesses don't involve compromise, but the goal should be to figure out how to have the most net benefit to the world (I don't think profit as an end in itself is a respectable goal). Thus, choose the compromises that are least detracting within the scope of real-world options.
paulcole 6y ago
It is quite simple and you said it yourself. > Adblockers stop sites from making money Stop right there. You don’t get to decide the site’s business model. They get to choose it, not you. And I mean duh, no kidding adblockers don’t stop online stores from letting people buy stuff. Thanks for the insight there.
- krapp 6y ago
  >You don’t get to decide the site’s business model. They get to choose it, not you. They can choose any model they like, but we decide whether or not it's profitable.
- quadrangle 6y ago
  > You don’t get to decide the site’s business model. I didn't say I get to DECIDE the site's business model, I get to JUDGE it. Do you want to argue about my judgment that ad-based business models are harmful?

mharroun 6y ago

So they need a set bushiness and tech teams to build an internal ad stack, and try to get advertisers... many who wont buy in without 3rd party tracking to mitigate fraud.

notriddle 6y ago
> So they need a set bushiness and tech teams to build an internal ad stack Somebody needs to take responsibility for the malicious and broken ads. I really don't care who does it; you can contract it out, or do it internally, just as long as the work actually gets done. The work isn't getting done, right now.
quadrangle 6y ago
There's better and worse in advertising, sure. But third-party ads are a compromised business model even at their best. I'm not saying businesses don't involve compromise, but the goal should be to figure out how to have the most net benefit to the world (I don't think profit as an end in itself is a respectable goal). Thus, choose the compromises that are least detracting within the scope of real-world options.

paulcole 6y ago

It is quite simple and you said it yourself. > Adblockers stop sites from making money Stop right there. You don’t get to decide the site’s business model. They get to choose it, not you. And I mean duh, no kidding adblockers don’t stop online stores from letting people buy stuff. Thanks for the insight there.

krapp 6y ago
>You don’t get to decide the site’s business model. They get to choose it, not you. They can choose any model they like, but we decide whether or not it's profitable.
quadrangle 6y ago
> You don’t get to decide the site’s business model. I didn't say I get to DECIDE the site's business model, I get to JUDGE it. Do you want to argue about my judgment that ad-based business models are harmful?