3 ms·

This is why it is perfectly fine to use an ad blocker by default, and perfectly fine for a website to refuse access with ad blockers enabled. At least then ther

by Joeri 4y ago

This is why it is perfectly fine to use an ad blocker by default, and perfectly fine for a website to refuse access with ad blockers enabled. At least then there’s a negotiation going on.

RunSet 4y ago
Further reading: https://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2015/10/why-its-ok-to-block-ads/ https://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2015/10/why-its-ok-to-...
jefftk 4y ago
> perfectly fine for a website to refuse access with ad blockers enabled And yet ublock origin tries to work around this. About a third of their issues are "this site refuses service to people with adblockers": https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues?q=is%3Aissue+anti-adblock https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues?q=is%3Aissue+...
- nonameiguess 4y ago
  Because they don't refuse access. They kindly ask you to disable, but don't require it, and the users of an ad blocker know damn well they're not going to voluntarily disable it if it's possible to browse the site at all with it on, so rather than rote click "continue" 90 times every two hours, let the blocker block the nagging popup as well. If these sites really don't want you there with an ad blocker, they can actually block you. I imagine they realize there is value in getting more eyeballs even without ads, whether that be that users might still recommend and create links to your content that other people without a blocker then follow, or you actually sell something and some of those people might buy it. Whatever it is, by revealed preference, those site owners seem to be indicating it's worth it to allow people to browse with an ad blocker.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    > Because they don't refuse access Nope; uBlock Origin will work around that as well. Skimming recent issues, in https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/15338 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/15338 atozmath.com detects that people are running an ad blocker [1], explains what they're doing, and refuses access. The discussion is how to make the site think ads aren't blocked, though they haven't succeeded yet. In https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/13801 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/13801 there's a simpler one with https://www.magicgameworld.com https://www.magicgameworld.com where it refuses access but doesn't provide reasoning, and that one was fixed. [1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/90739617/196804351-0dbea8d4-c68c-460a-a6b4-eb0adc7756a2.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/90739617/196804351...
  - gorhill 4y ago
    By default we try to work around sites which require that the user disable their content blocker, as this is not acceptable since content blockers are used for more than to just block advertisement. In uBO, trackers and malware sites are also blocked, and thus it's not acceptable that sites require to wholly disable uBO. By default, we do not try to work around sites which make a polite demand that the users disable their blockers without preventing access, this way the final decision is up to the users.

by Joeri 4y ago

This is why it is perfectly fine to use an ad blocker by default, and perfectly fine for a website to refuse access with ad blockers enabled. At least then there’s a negotiation going on.

RunSet 4y ago

Further reading: https://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2015/10/why-its-ok-to-block-ads/ https://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2015/10/why-its-ok-to-...

jefftk 4y ago

> perfectly fine for a website to refuse access with ad blockers enabled And yet ublock origin tries to work around this. About a third of their issues are "this site refuses service to people with adblockers": https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues?q=is%3Aissue+anti-adblock https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues?q=is%3Aissue+...

nonameiguess 4y ago
Because they don't refuse access. They kindly ask you to disable, but don't require it, and the users of an ad blocker know damn well they're not going to voluntarily disable it if it's possible to browse the site at all with it on, so rather than rote click "continue" 90 times every two hours, let the blocker block the nagging popup as well. If these sites really don't want you there with an ad blocker, they can actually block you. I imagine they realize there is value in getting more eyeballs even without ads, whether that be that users might still recommend and create links to your content that other people without a blocker then follow, or you actually sell something and some of those people might buy it. Whatever it is, by revealed preference, those site owners seem to be indicating it's worth it to allow people to browse with an ad blocker.
- jefftk 4y ago
  > Because they don't refuse access Nope; uBlock Origin will work around that as well. Skimming recent issues, in https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/15338 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/15338 atozmath.com detects that people are running an ad blocker [1], explains what they're doing, and refuses access. The discussion is how to make the site think ads aren't blocked, though they haven't succeeded yet. In https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/13801 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uAssets/issues/13801 there's a simpler one with https://www.magicgameworld.com https://www.magicgameworld.com where it refuses access but doesn't provide reasoning, and that one was fixed. [1] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/90739617/196804351-0dbea8d4-c68c-460a-a6b4-eb0adc7756a2.png https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/90739617/196804351...
- gorhill 4y ago
  By default we try to work around sites which require that the user disable their content blocker, as this is not acceptable since content blockers are used for more than to just block advertisement. In uBO, trackers and malware sites are also blocked, and thus it's not acceptable that sites require to wholly disable uBO. By default, we do not try to work around sites which make a polite demand that the users disable their blockers without preventing access, this way the final decision is up to the users.