3 ms·

So... Why not support the ones that just remove it? Because you're implicitly legitimizing advertising practices (albeit at a hgher cost) by supporting these yo

• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > you're implicitly legitimizing advertising practices There is a middle ground of people okay with advertising, but pissed off about the nightmare that is the present state of internet ads. I use uBlock. But I’d be okay with e.g. text ads that don’t track me.
• Taywee 5y ago
  I use uBlock Origin. I'm just saying that I see blocking ads and strong arming disgusting companies into losing some of their ill-gotten profits as not much of a bad thing. I don't see any way that ABP existing is worse for the end user than it not existing, especially if you don't even use it anyway.
  • salawat 5y ago
    It's a mindshare thing. Ultimately, courts take into account any information of an ecosystem experts bring to them. By having ABP widely used a lawyer could make the argument, or a judge could infer that advertising is an acceptable behavior, but the use of ABP is just the users signaling to advertisers that ABP content is rather preferred method. If everyone used uBlock Origin on the other hand, a compelling argument against the legitimacy of intrusive advertising becomes much more likely to be accepted in court, which is where it matters. It's sad it's come to this, but with advertising and marketing as huge active lobbying groups, the courts are one of the more even battlefields we stand to even be able to win on.