3 ms·

>very rarely Really? there's a commenter in this very thread who's having that experience. And I have seen this ad blocker FAIL issue raised here from time to

>very rarely Really? there's a commenter in this very thread who's having that experience. And I have seen this ad blocker FAIL issue raised here from time to time. More than "very rarely" judging from my own eyes.... >advertising enables surveillance, ads cost resources, and they distract from the content. I'm amused whenever I see avoiding surveillance raised here. That ship has sailed. Did you notice your neighbor's Ring doorbell camera, BTW?

em-bee 8mo ago
ok, maybe very rarely is too strong. i do have the experience rarely myself however. i suppose it also depends on which sites you go to. with ad surveillance even a 90% reduction is a win (my own experience is even better than that), so in my opinion it is definitely worth it. Did you notice your neighbor's Ring doorbell camera yes, i noticed its absence. in my home country cameras recording video beyond your own property or sound are illegal. an even in the US resistance is growing. so in my opinion that ship can still be sunk.
fransje26 8mo ago
Where "very rarely" should be read as "None". And even if such an insignificant technicality could pop up from time to time, there is no actual debate on what is "better", when the counterpoint is literally this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47480507 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47480507