4 ms·

Is uBlock Origin not free? I can't imagine browsing the web without an adblocker, any non-invasive ads may as well not exist. The service is being subsidised by

• kodapoda 3y ago
  Wasn't there an article published recently about the ads team asking the search team to make the results less relevant to boost Google's revenue?
• viraptor 3y ago
  Sure, but then you're fighting with the service provider. Your incentives are not aligned and the service you get may suffer. If you can't afford the alternative, go for it. But if you can, you get results which are not shaped by the behaviour of people who see the ads, which may degrade your experience. Using ddg, you also effectively keep up ad supported businesses, since that's where you get the results from. One day you may find other engines don't want to provide the feed to ddg anymore or ddg doesn't want to serve you results with unlock.
• sshine 3y ago
  > Is uBlock Origin not free? I can't imagine browsing the web without an adblocker Practically, as long as you are in the minority who use blockers, others will pay for your search. What you see with YouTube striking on people with blockers is that they have become too popular. So using a blocker you will get a degraded service in the periods where the arms race tilts in favour of the advertiser. I object to this premise: I never agreed to watch ads in the first place. If I’m not welcome on a platform when I remove the parts I’m not interested in, I’ll pick another platform. > what cost am I paying for using DDG? Ads, data mining, commercialised results. It’s not terrible. DDG is what Google was before they turned ads to 11.