3 ms·

Or replace cutscenes in video games, or short videos on ads on mobile (already small and people are barely paying attention) Nowadays when I randomly open a ne

by inerte 1y ago

Or replace cutscenes in video games, or short videos on ads on mobile (already small and people are barely paying attention) Nowadays when I randomly open a news website to read some article, at the bottom of the page all the generic "hack to lose your belly" or "doctors recommend weird japanese device" or "how seniors can fly business class", I've been noticing lately 1/3rd of the images seem to be AI generated...

nathan_compton 1y ago
God, what a dismal future we're building.
nine_k 1y ago
Warning: browsing the Web without an ad blocker is hazardous to your mental health. If you regularly see ads permeating most web pages, and don't know how to avoid that, you may need to see a specialist.
- AStonesThrow 1y ago
  Perhaps some of us choose not to rip off payments that are due to the people who provide a service that we're using. If I visit a website that's so infested with ads that I don't like being there, it's on me to stop visiting that website. I simply don't think it's fair to cheat service providers when we don't like their service. You have a choice, and that choice is to not use that service at all. They're providing it under the terms that it is ad-supported. If you don't want to support it, but you still want to use it, then you're cheating someone. That is dishonest and unethical.
  - quesera 1y ago
    If ad-supported sites would return an optional response header indicating such, and their opinion on adblocking visitors. E.g.: Advertisement-Permission: [required|requested] And my adblockers had a config option to abort pageloads with an appropriate error message, if `required` or `requested`, then I would use it happily. In the meantime, I'm browsing every site with all content blockers set at maximum, because any other choice is incomprehensible on the modern web. If I consequently visit some sites that want me to consume advertising of which I am unaware, then that is entirely their issue, not mine.

by inerte 1y ago

nathan_compton 1y ago

God, what a dismal future we're building.

nine_k 1y ago

Warning: browsing the Web without an ad blocker is hazardous to your mental health. If you regularly see ads permeating most web pages, and don't know how to avoid that, you may need to see a specialist.

AStonesThrow 1y ago
Perhaps some of us choose not to rip off payments that are due to the people who provide a service that we're using. If I visit a website that's so infested with ads that I don't like being there, it's on me to stop visiting that website. I simply don't think it's fair to cheat service providers when we don't like their service. You have a choice, and that choice is to not use that service at all. They're providing it under the terms that it is ad-supported. If you don't want to support it, but you still want to use it, then you're cheating someone. That is dishonest and unethical.
- quesera 1y ago
  If ad-supported sites would return an optional response header indicating such, and their opinion on adblocking visitors. E.g.: Advertisement-Permission: [required|requested] And my adblockers had a config option to abort pageloads with an appropriate error message, if `required` or `requested`, then I would use it happily. In the meantime, I'm browsing every site with all content blockers set at maximum, because any other choice is incomprehensible on the modern web. If I consequently visit some sites that want me to consume advertising of which I am unaware, then that is entirely their issue, not mine.