4 ms·

>There is an unwritten social contract here. I don't feel that is an accurate take. Websites tried charging money for access and the internet citizenry respond

>There is an unwritten social contract here. I don't feel that is an accurate take. Websites tried charging money for access and the internet citizenry responded pretty clearly that the overwhelming majority of websites were not worthy of payment for access. So websites tried a run-around - advertising. And the use of ad-blockers exist because internet users are again voting that they would rather the website(s) disappear than be forced to watch a level of obtrusive advertising they found unacceptable enough that they turned to adblockers. And I would suggest to you that if website owners were to find a way to defeat adblockers, the majority of them would lose their traffic.

noirbot 2y ago
This is kinda just the reality of it. The promise of the internet was that anyone could put anything they want on the internet for anyone to see and access, but there was never a promise they'd get paid for it, even to cover the cost of hosting it. There's an entitlement now to "Well, I put it online so you must pay me" and frankly, not everyone deserves it. Or at least not everyone deserves it as much as they think they deserve it. Does this mean many astute and skilled people I like don't get paid what they deserve? Absolutely, but that was already the case for centuries before. They just didn't used to have the option to go "it's freeeee" and then have half of the world spy on me in exchange for it, and maybe that's not a good thing.
what 2y ago
>ad-blockers exist because internet users are again voting they would rather the websites disappear Clearly not, or they would just stop using those sites. Instead they want the content at zero cost.
- ndriscoll 2y ago
  It's not like links come with ad warnings. I don't know or care which sites try to show ads, but I'd be fine with them all shutting down. It'd simply make room for everyone else.

noirbot 2y ago

This is kinda just the reality of it. The promise of the internet was that anyone could put anything they want on the internet for anyone to see and access, but there was never a promise they'd get paid for it, even to cover the cost of hosting it. There's an entitlement now to "Well, I put it online so you must pay me" and frankly, not everyone deserves it. Or at least not everyone deserves it as much as they think they deserve it. Does this mean many astute and skilled people I like don't get paid what they deserve? Absolutely, but that was already the case for centuries before. They just didn't used to have the option to go "it's freeeee" and then have half of the world spy on me in exchange for it, and maybe that's not a good thing.

what 2y ago

>ad-blockers exist because internet users are again voting they would rather the websites disappear Clearly not, or they would just stop using those sites. Instead they want the content at zero cost.

ndriscoll 2y ago
It's not like links come with ad warnings. I don't know or care which sites try to show ads, but I'd be fine with them all shutting down. It'd simply make room for everyone else.