4 ms·
Life is a shade of grays, in this particular case I think it's reasonable to want to block big giant ugly ads (those infested with js for tracking purposes) but
by mattigames 2y ago
Life is a shade of grays, in this particular case I think it's reasonable to want to block big giant ugly ads (those infested with js for tracking purposes) but still believe that the site should always be allowed to display a lot less intrusive advertisement, like mentioning a restaurant in the article body, or some links at the side bar for their social media or partner sites, summarization of this kind just nukes all possibilities of clean simple advertising so no, I don't think it's that close as you believe to be to ad-blocker extensions.
- CaptainFever 2y agoI disagree slightly. Ad blockers do block non-intrusive advertisements too, for example Ethical Ads, or sponsorblock on YouTube. To me it's less about intrusiveness/privacy and more about "I control what I see". And in-text ads can already be removed by summarisation tools (even from before the AI era!) or by apps like Boring Report.
- mattigames 2y agoJust to be clear, sponsorblock has less than 3% the number of users of Ublock origin alone, so while an interesting utility and a interesting subject for the ad-blocking debate ethics-wise it has nowhere near enough prevalence to be significant when talking about ad-blockers used by the masses. And "the boring report" it's not even optimized for mobile viewing (Android), at least in my experience a few minutes ago: https://i.imgur.com/q6e3DzM.jpg https://i.imgur.com/q6e3DzM.jpg