4 ms·

Give these guys a break. If I'm being honest, why the hell are you surfing internet without ubo? I guess you said mobile so its most likely chrome so guess wh

Give these guys a break. If I'm being honest, why the hell are you surfing internet without ubo? I guess you said mobile so its most likely chrome so guess what? Firefox mobile has ubo and heck even Firefox focus has decent ad blocker. Even on iOS you have some content blockers so you really don't have any reason to use chrome on phones. If they are making money regardless of my using ubo, that's good for them.

gabereiser 3y ago
Sure, blame the user… This is why we have distros with ads like the OP. It’s our fault for seeing the propaganda you shove down our throats. Give me a break.
- sheepscreek 3y ago
  There’s no such thing as a free beer. Someone is paying for it. As long as it’s not some kind of spyware, I’ll take the ads and donation prompts. If we’re discussing annoyance, Wikipedia’s campaigns are a great deal more annoying (but it works).
  - SahAssar 3y ago
    > There’s no such thing as a free beer. Except there is. Many linux distros are exactly free as in beer besides being free as in speech.
    - Dalewyn 3y ago
      A better analogy might be there's no such thing as a free lunch. All those distros you mention either have commercial support (eg: Red Hat, Ubuntu) or substantial recurring donations. Someone somewhere is paying even if you specifically aren't.
      - uwagar 3y ago
        im yet to pay a dime for mx linux and its freaking fast and awesome.
        lockhouse 3y ago
        Cool, but as has been already mentioned in this thread someone is footing the bill. Even if the developers are fine with donating their time to develop and maintain it for free it still costs very real money to run servers.
        SahAssar 3y ago
        And there are many people donating their time and servers. Most mirrors for for example arch are either universities or organizations that derive value from arch. Many contributors for OSS either use it as part of their work or find it fulfilling to work on it or do research with it. That's not to say that all OSS is like this, or that all software should be ran like this but there clearly is "free beer" and "free speech" in certain places. You might say that I pay for the universities with my taxes or the other organizations by increased prices on goods, but it clearly is offered as a free service for all, even people not paying taxes or buying their goods.
        uwagar 3y ago
        dont guilt trip me (and yourself) please. u sound close like the 'dont copy that floppy' brigade. the developers of mx linux themselves are proud that they dont explicitly ask for donations. its unspoken, and anonymous giving is best. everyone else interested simply benefits and when they are benefited enough, they perhaps will contribute. everything cant be laid out in black and white and in advance. there is a strong unspoken assumption that good can result out of helping yourself and others with Free software.
        scrps 3y ago
        I'd suggest perhaps donating if it is awesome. If you can't donate there are lots of ways to help: add a feature, host a pkg repo mirror, clean up docs, fix bugs, add/manage a package, donate older hardware for compat testing, help out with community support, github issues. Telling people it is awesome also helps but maybe a more detailed why would go a bit further to promote it. Would be more helpful though if corp OSS users who have their entire operations underpinned by financially undersupported OSS projects stepped up to help.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago
  I understand what you mean but it's just the world we live in. These surveillance capitalism and attention economy corporations are actively hostile to us and there's no proper legal solution in sight. Therefore we must actively take measures to defend ourselves against their exploitation. Software like uBlock Origin is digital self-defense.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
seedie 3y ago
Yes, using an adblocker would be a way for me to not see ads. But I'm not using one because I usually don't mind seeing ads as it's the main income for most sites. In this case the ad to content ratio is just too much for my taste. Too many ads and not enough distinction between ads and content. BTW I tried to add more constructive criticism in another reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36653500 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36653500 as the parent is flagged dead by now it might not be easily visible
- still_grokking 3y ago
  > But I'm not using one because I usually don't mind seeing ads The ads aren't the problem. The problem is the spy industry behind. Surfing without content blocker is like selling your soul and your first born to the devil, to get nothing in return.

gabereiser 3y ago

Sure, blame the user… This is why we have distros with ads like the OP. It’s our fault for seeing the propaganda you shove down our throats. Give me a break.

sheepscreek 3y ago
There’s no such thing as a free beer. Someone is paying for it. As long as it’s not some kind of spyware, I’ll take the ads and donation prompts. If we’re discussing annoyance, Wikipedia’s campaigns are a great deal more annoying (but it works).
- SahAssar 3y ago
  > There’s no such thing as a free beer. Except there is. Many linux distros are exactly free as in beer besides being free as in speech.
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    A better analogy might be there's no such thing as a free lunch. All those distros you mention either have commercial support (eg: Red Hat, Ubuntu) or substantial recurring donations. Someone somewhere is paying even if you specifically aren't.
    - uwagar 3y ago
      im yet to pay a dime for mx linux and its freaking fast and awesome.
      - lockhouse 3y ago
        Cool, but as has been already mentioned in this thread someone is footing the bill. Even if the developers are fine with donating their time to develop and maintain it for free it still costs very real money to run servers.
        SahAssar 3y ago
        And there are many people donating their time and servers. Most mirrors for for example arch are either universities or organizations that derive value from arch. Many contributors for OSS either use it as part of their work or find it fulfilling to work on it or do research with it. That's not to say that all OSS is like this, or that all software should be ran like this but there clearly is "free beer" and "free speech" in certain places. You might say that I pay for the universities with my taxes or the other organizations by increased prices on goods, but it clearly is offered as a free service for all, even people not paying taxes or buying their goods.
        uwagar 3y ago
        dont guilt trip me (and yourself) please. u sound close like the 'dont copy that floppy' brigade. the developers of mx linux themselves are proud that they dont explicitly ask for donations. its unspoken, and anonymous giving is best. everyone else interested simply benefits and when they are benefited enough, they perhaps will contribute. everything cant be laid out in black and white and in advance. there is a strong unspoken assumption that good can result out of helping yourself and others with Free software.
      - scrps 3y ago
        I'd suggest perhaps donating if it is awesome. If you can't donate there are lots of ways to help: add a feature, host a pkg repo mirror, clean up docs, fix bugs, add/manage a package, donate older hardware for compat testing, help out with community support, github issues. Telling people it is awesome also helps but maybe a more detailed why would go a bit further to promote it. Would be more helpful though if corp OSS users who have their entire operations underpinned by financially undersupported OSS projects stepped up to help.
matheusmoreira 3y ago
I understand what you mean but it's just the world we live in. These surveillance capitalism and attention economy corporations are actively hostile to us and there's no proper legal solution in sight. Therefore we must actively take measures to defend ourselves against their exploitation. Software like uBlock Origin is digital self-defense.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

seedie 3y ago

Yes, using an adblocker would be a way for me to not see ads. But I'm not using one because I usually don't mind seeing ads as it's the main income for most sites. In this case the ad to content ratio is just too much for my taste. Too many ads and not enough distinction between ads and content. BTW I tried to add more constructive criticism in another reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36653500 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36653500 as the parent is flagged dead by now it might not be easily visible

still_grokking 3y ago
> But I'm not using one because I usually don't mind seeing ads The ads aren't the problem. The problem is the spy industry behind. Surfing without content blocker is like selling your soul and your first born to the devil, to get nothing in return.