I disagree. No site has a right to force me to look at ads. And I don't have a right to force them to provide a service. Their offer is "come here for free, and

I disagree. No site has a right to force me to look at ads. And I don't have a right to force them to provide a service. Their offer is "come here for free, and we're hoping you'll look at these ads." They could change their offer. They could require payment. Maybe their service is something people will pay for and maybe not. If I don't pay and I don't look at ads, I have no right to expect the site to keep existing. But that's OK with me. It's like a casino that sells cheap dinners. Clearly, they want you to eat the cheap dinner and lose much more money gambling. But you're allowed to eat it and leave. If they wanted to prohibit that, they could make the dinner available only to those who gamble. But if they haven't set that condition, you don't have to obey it. All that said, I don't mind tasteful ads. I don't block ads on StackOverflow because they're interesting. I do block ads on Yahoo Mail (on the rare occasions that I log into my throwaway account there) because they're annoying and often offensive. If Yahoo says to me, "we're closing your account because you block our ads", I will say "that's fine." There are services I'm willing to pay for and services I'll only use if they're free. Looking at ads is a form of payment. Some sites are worth it, and others aren't.