Ads are not the same thing as spying. One of the biggest problems with this whole discussion is that people, including those who should know better, are not ma

Ads are not the same thing as spying. One of the biggest problems with this whole discussion is that people, including those who should know better, are not making distinctions between ads based maybe on broad characteristics vs ads that are based on tracking every move you make across the internet, purchases in stores with credit cards, and micro targeting based on specific interests. With just ads you can place a direct value on how much people are willing to pay to not see them. Netflix does this. Hulu does this by offering 2 services, as free and and supported at different prices. Normal business practices should create a market that allows people who are willing to see ads and those who wish to pay more to be ad free to both be serviced. The problem right now with micro targeting and extreme spying is that you have a race to the bottom that has users paying for the services they use not through watching ads, or monetary payments but through data and information about themselves. That data is much more valuable than just for ads. It makes it extremely difficult for someone who isn’t the biggest player in a market to, for example, compete with the entrenched power. So it’s not just people watching creepy ads, but it also entrenches monopolies, and allows the likes of Google and Facebook to create new monopolies based on data they have gained from their existing monopolies. Ads are, if anything, the least problematic part about the spying and data collection because at least they are open and obvious to everyone. Google and Facebook do far more creepy things than what they do with the ads privately, but the largest uproar has been about ads simply because that’s the most transparent use of the crazy data collection practices.