3 ms·

The ad-free internet has already been here for a long time if you are willing to spend 10 minutes install ublock origin. Paying is actually worse on all aspects

The ad-free internet has already been here for a long time if you are willing to spend 10 minutes install ublock origin. Paying is actually worse on all aspects, even if you ignore the cost, because it shows the fact that you have some amount of disposable income and are willing to pay for things, which greatly increases the value of advertising to you specifically.

Habgdnv 3y ago
Ah, this takes me back! I remember the days before Facebook, YouTube, and heck, even before Google was a thing. Anyone else remember using Altavista? Those were simpler times online. When you opened a webpage, it was all about the content – dense, to the point, and no beating around the bush. It was high-quality stuff and, best of all, ad-free. I really miss those days. There was something special about the internet back then. It felt more like exploring a vast library full of hidden gems rather than being in a mall bombarded with ads and clickbait. Dreaming of a return to that kind of internet feels like wishing for a time machine, but hey, a person can hope, right?
haswell 3y ago
While I use ublock and ad blocking DNS, this particular ad-free Internet isn’t sustainable. For better or worse, the business model behind many of these sites rely on the ad revenue to continue existing, and ad blocking only works as long as most people still aren’t doing it.
- oldpersonintx 3y ago
  Don't worry about sustainability. There was life before YouTube and Facebook and there will be life after. I am not sacrificing my mental well-being for a false economy. If the internet rots out its own Ponzi Scheme, we will build something else
  - haswell 3y ago
    > The ad-free internet has already been here for a long time > Don't worry about sustainability. There was life before YouTube and Facebook and there will be life after Which is it? The point is that this version of the ad-free doesn’t actually exist in the long run. In a discussion about a move away from the “false economy” you highlight via paid subscriptions (presumably not a false economy), it seems odd to say that this already exists while also admitting that it doesn’t/can’t.
    - 5evOX5hTZ9mYa9E 3y ago
      Internet existed before it was commercialized up the wazoo. The way I see it, if all the so-called platforms (Google, Facebook, etc) went bankrupt tomorrow, the internet as a whole would be better, not worse.
- phone8675309 3y ago
  > For better or worse, the business model behind many of these sites rely on the ad revenue to continue existing I fail to see how this is my problem as an end user.
pixl97 3y ago
For some values of ad-free. Direct ads from the site you are viewing, yea adblock is great. Aren't you feeling thirsty and want the cool crisp refreshing taste of an ice cold coca cola right now? In content ads, and user posts as ads are far more difficult to deal with, but at least they don't track you.
- gspencley 3y ago
  I'm actually OK with "product placement" ads as long as they don't interrupt the content. It IS annoying when a YouTube creator interrupts the content to say "And now an ad for a VPN which has NOTHING to do with what you are watching or care about..." but I've seen some YouTube creators actually integrate the product being sponsored into their content in a way that makes sense and serves both purposes. For example, I was watching a "maker" video where they 3d printed some models for the project that were provided by their sponsor for use in the project they were showing you how to make. That type of "advertising" I can support. It doesn't detract from the content or distract, the product is relevant to what you are watching and, as you said, it doesn't track you other than tracking aggregate viewing numbers and how many people skip that section of the video. Classic examples would be things like Apple paying to have their laptops or computers used as the props in movies. Or a car manufacturer having their vehicles shown. As long as it doesn't take you out of the content and make you feel like you've been interrupted to be advertised to then that's the one and only form of advertising I don't hate. I guess there's also "opt in" stuff, like the user taking deliberate action to subscribe to a product magazine or newsletter is fine too... emphasis on "opt in" and "deliberate action", however. Nothing gets me to avoid doing business with a company faster than if their "Sign up to your newsletter" checkbox is default checked or, worse, there is no check box and you've been auto signed up and need to unsubscribe. Thanks for punishing me by doing business with you, assholes. The rest can go away forever and never come back.
  - InCityDreams 3y ago
    >Classic examples would be things like Apple paying to have their laptops or computers used as the props in movies. Or a car manufacturer having their vehicles shown. Ah! Wayne's World...way (way) ahead of its time.
AlienRobot 3y ago
I don't get this "adblocking culture". If you don't tolerate ads, you could just... not visit the site? Close the tab? I don't like paying for things, but I've never been in a transaction where I could say "you know what, I don't like the price of this, I'll just take it and give you no money. Deal?"
- Habgdnv 3y ago
  This whole thing feels like a "right to repair" situation to me. When I pull up a website, it's like it lands in my yard. If it's so jam-packed with ads that I can't find what I need, it's like it's broken. So, I tweak it a bit to make it readable again – kind of like fixing it up so I can actually use it. Just trying to make the web work for me, you know?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- anononaut 3y ago
  It's not a very good analogy. In your hypothetical, at that point, the other party would obviously say no deal and not provide you with what you want. The browser ad equivalent would be not serving up their content to you. I am entitled to decide what runs on my computer and how. They only option another party has is whether or not they will provide service to me.
- hydrok9 3y ago
  I feel like this is basically the same thing as saying don't use the internet at all.
- phone8675309 3y ago
  Most other things are fully a "take it or leave" it deal - pay or you can't get access. If I take food from the grocery store without paying then they will call the police. Most ad supported websites aren't like that. They let anybody access the content and only then try to insert ads. That's like trying to close the barn door after the horse has left, and it's a fundamental property of the medium of web publishing. You can do things to push back against it - put the site behind a username/password and block users who aren't looking at the ads - but this prevents people from discovering the site in the first place. This is ultimately a mismatch between the desires of the business and the medium they have decided to use, and it's on _them_ to figure that out, not end users.

Habgdnv 3y ago

Ah, this takes me back! I remember the days before Facebook, YouTube, and heck, even before Google was a thing. Anyone else remember using Altavista? Those were simpler times online. When you opened a webpage, it was all about the content – dense, to the point, and no beating around the bush. It was high-quality stuff and, best of all, ad-free. I really miss those days. There was something special about the internet back then. It felt more like exploring a vast library full of hidden gems rather than being in a mall bombarded with ads and clickbait. Dreaming of a return to that kind of internet feels like wishing for a time machine, but hey, a person can hope, right?

haswell 3y ago

While I use ublock and ad blocking DNS, this particular ad-free Internet isn’t sustainable. For better or worse, the business model behind many of these sites rely on the ad revenue to continue existing, and ad blocking only works as long as most people still aren’t doing it.

oldpersonintx 3y ago
Don't worry about sustainability. There was life before YouTube and Facebook and there will be life after. I am not sacrificing my mental well-being for a false economy. If the internet rots out its own Ponzi Scheme, we will build something else
- haswell 3y ago
  > The ad-free internet has already been here for a long time > Don't worry about sustainability. There was life before YouTube and Facebook and there will be life after Which is it? The point is that this version of the ad-free doesn’t actually exist in the long run. In a discussion about a move away from the “false economy” you highlight via paid subscriptions (presumably not a false economy), it seems odd to say that this already exists while also admitting that it doesn’t/can’t.
  - 5evOX5hTZ9mYa9E 3y ago
    Internet existed before it was commercialized up the wazoo. The way I see it, if all the so-called platforms (Google, Facebook, etc) went bankrupt tomorrow, the internet as a whole would be better, not worse.
phone8675309 3y ago
> For better or worse, the business model behind many of these sites rely on the ad revenue to continue existing I fail to see how this is my problem as an end user.

pixl97 3y ago

For some values of ad-free. Direct ads from the site you are viewing, yea adblock is great. Aren't you feeling thirsty and want the cool crisp refreshing taste of an ice cold coca cola right now? In content ads, and user posts as ads are far more difficult to deal with, but at least they don't track you.

gspencley 3y ago
I'm actually OK with "product placement" ads as long as they don't interrupt the content. It IS annoying when a YouTube creator interrupts the content to say "And now an ad for a VPN which has NOTHING to do with what you are watching or care about..." but I've seen some YouTube creators actually integrate the product being sponsored into their content in a way that makes sense and serves both purposes. For example, I was watching a "maker" video where they 3d printed some models for the project that were provided by their sponsor for use in the project they were showing you how to make. That type of "advertising" I can support. It doesn't detract from the content or distract, the product is relevant to what you are watching and, as you said, it doesn't track you other than tracking aggregate viewing numbers and how many people skip that section of the video. Classic examples would be things like Apple paying to have their laptops or computers used as the props in movies. Or a car manufacturer having their vehicles shown. As long as it doesn't take you out of the content and make you feel like you've been interrupted to be advertised to then that's the one and only form of advertising I don't hate. I guess there's also "opt in" stuff, like the user taking deliberate action to subscribe to a product magazine or newsletter is fine too... emphasis on "opt in" and "deliberate action", however. Nothing gets me to avoid doing business with a company faster than if their "Sign up to your newsletter" checkbox is default checked or, worse, there is no check box and you've been auto signed up and need to unsubscribe. Thanks for punishing me by doing business with you, assholes. The rest can go away forever and never come back.
- InCityDreams 3y ago
  >Classic examples would be things like Apple paying to have their laptops or computers used as the props in movies. Or a car manufacturer having their vehicles shown. Ah! Wayne's World...way (way) ahead of its time.

AlienRobot 3y ago

I don't get this "adblocking culture". If you don't tolerate ads, you could just... not visit the site? Close the tab? I don't like paying for things, but I've never been in a transaction where I could say "you know what, I don't like the price of this, I'll just take it and give you no money. Deal?"

Habgdnv 3y ago
This whole thing feels like a "right to repair" situation to me. When I pull up a website, it's like it lands in my yard. If it's so jam-packed with ads that I can't find what I need, it's like it's broken. So, I tweak it a bit to make it readable again – kind of like fixing it up so I can actually use it. Just trying to make the web work for me, you know?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
anononaut 3y ago
It's not a very good analogy. In your hypothetical, at that point, the other party would obviously say no deal and not provide you with what you want. The browser ad equivalent would be not serving up their content to you. I am entitled to decide what runs on my computer and how. They only option another party has is whether or not they will provide service to me.
hydrok9 3y ago
I feel like this is basically the same thing as saying don't use the internet at all.
phone8675309 3y ago
Most other things are fully a "take it or leave" it deal - pay or you can't get access. If I take food from the grocery store without paying then they will call the police. Most ad supported websites aren't like that. They let anybody access the content and only then try to insert ads. That's like trying to close the barn door after the horse has left, and it's a fundamental property of the medium of web publishing. You can do things to push back against it - put the site behind a username/password and block users who aren't looking at the ads - but this prevents people from discovering the site in the first place. This is ultimately a mismatch between the desires of the business and the medium they have decided to use, and it's on _them_ to figure that out, not end users.