6 ms·

Yes, it's a bad thing. Because you can't choose what's acceptable, they do. You won't decide the topic, format, quantity, density, duration, nature or interru

Yes, it's a bad thing. Because you can't choose what's acceptable, they do. You won't decide the topic, format, quantity, density, duration, nature or interruption type. Which is different for you, me, or your children. What's more, ads are not made for your benefit, ever, but to the benefit of the advertiser which may (but statistically more likely may not) align with yours. And also because: - the incentive gets twisted, which means you can't trust ublock on the long run. - unkown unknowns means down the road, some ads will manage to track you or serve malicious content despite ublock filtering. - ads paid content is a terrible business model which take a price people are not wired to assess nor realize they pay for something they disguise as free yet has an impact on the entire society. Not a great thing to encourage. And I say all that as someone who gets revenue from ads.

diffeomorphism 5y ago
> because you can't choose That seems like just an implementation detail. If users are able to choose/vote what is "acceptable" that seems like a concept worth trying.
mundo03 5y ago
Right, any idea on how to keep content accessible and people with paychecks maintaining it?
- BiteCode_dev 5y ago
gorhill 5y ago
> you can't trust ublock on the long run Why is this? Would you also say this for other long running open source projects which have never breach the trust of their users?
- tpxl 5y ago
  Forgive me if I'm wrong, but wasn't uBlock handed over (changed owners? don't quite know how to put it) and uBlock origin started later precisely because uBlock breached the trust of their users?
  - gorhill 5y ago
    I am assuming the person was referring to "uBlock Origin" given that "uBlock" has already shown it can't be trusted, maybe I am wrong and he was indeed referring to "uBlock". The repo was handed in good faith, not for the sake of financial gains. It turned out to be a mistake, from which I learned. That was now nearly seven years ago. If the take away from that event after years of never breaching user trust is that "uBlock Origin can't be trusted in the long run", that's pretty harsh.
    - ajnin 5y ago
      He was replying to a comment about the "Acceptable Ads" policy so he was clearly talking about uBlock, not uBlock Origin. I think the story of how uBlock was transfered and then managed in a way that was not what you wished is pretty well known, and I think most people know that you forked back the project to restore that trust, and they appreciate the work you're doing for the community. At least I know I do, so let me take this opportunity to say thank you.
    - nopenopenopeno 5y ago
      uBlock Origin is an entirely volunteer-run project. There is very little reason to trust that it will be around for any particular amount of time.
      - Shared404 5y ago
        And the person you're talking to is the main dev. Based on his past actions, I feel comfortable trusting and using uBO until he decides he's done.
        nopenopenopeno 5y ago
__saykou 5y ago
> Because you can't choose what's acceptable, they do. Not exactly the acceptable ads must conform to the standard that is defined by the acceptable ads Committee which consists of publishers users, and distribution. Something like that.

diffeomorphism 5y ago

> because you can't choose That seems like just an implementation detail. If users are able to choose/vote what is "acceptable" that seems like a concept worth trying.

mundo03 5y ago

Right, any idea on how to keep content accessible and people with paychecks maintaining it?

BiteCode_dev 5y ago

gorhill 5y ago

> you can't trust ublock on the long run Why is this? Would you also say this for other long running open source projects which have never breach the trust of their users?

tpxl 5y ago
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but wasn't uBlock handed over (changed owners? don't quite know how to put it) and uBlock origin started later precisely because uBlock breached the trust of their users?
- gorhill 5y ago
  I am assuming the person was referring to "uBlock Origin" given that "uBlock" has already shown it can't be trusted, maybe I am wrong and he was indeed referring to "uBlock". The repo was handed in good faith, not for the sake of financial gains. It turned out to be a mistake, from which I learned. That was now nearly seven years ago. If the take away from that event after years of never breaching user trust is that "uBlock Origin can't be trusted in the long run", that's pretty harsh.
  - ajnin 5y ago
    He was replying to a comment about the "Acceptable Ads" policy so he was clearly talking about uBlock, not uBlock Origin. I think the story of how uBlock was transfered and then managed in a way that was not what you wished is pretty well known, and I think most people know that you forked back the project to restore that trust, and they appreciate the work you're doing for the community. At least I know I do, so let me take this opportunity to say thank you.
  - nopenopenopeno 5y ago
    uBlock Origin is an entirely volunteer-run project. There is very little reason to trust that it will be around for any particular amount of time.
    - Shared404 5y ago
      And the person you're talking to is the main dev. Based on his past actions, I feel comfortable trusting and using uBO until he decides he's done.
      - nopenopenopeno 5y ago

__saykou 5y ago

> Because you can't choose what's acceptable, they do. Not exactly the acceptable ads must conform to the standard that is defined by the acceptable ads Committee which consists of publishers users, and distribution. Something like that.