4 ms·

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

by griftah 17y ago

sho 17y ago
It's not a "tragedy of the commons", it's the failure of private businesses to monetise their operations without pissing people off so much they go and install special software to avoid it. Big difference.
- sho 17y ago
  Instead of downmodding, maybe someone would like to point out how I'm wrong? We are talking about private for-profit web sites. They are not a shared public good like rivers, the air, or indeed the english "commons" of old.
  - axod 17y ago
    By using adblock, you're abusing trust. You're assuming the website you visit is going to be intrusive and horrible to you. You're putting your fingers in your ears and saying "Nothing you ever say to me is going to be useful to me". It's anti-social, and if everyone did it, it'd be a horrible world. Imagine if you did that on a personal level - if someone started talking to you about a new movie they saw that they liked, and you instantly cover your ears so you can't hear them.
    - enneff 17y ago
      What does this have to do with advertising? Since when is advertsing equated with speech? The type of advertising blocked by Adblock is a form of unsolicited communication. Your analogy is a terrible one, by the way. A better one is picking up an ad-supported magazine, and asking a helpful friend (one whose judgement you trust - the parallel here being to the EasyList maintainers) to rip all the ads out for you before you read it. If people could block ads on TV and in print, prevent themselves from seeing billboards, etc, newsflash: they would! If I could go through my life without being subjected to people trying to sell me stuff all the time, I would be a much happier person. Just because we grew up in a world dominated by consumerism does not mean that's the way it should be, or the only way it can be. If more people were proactive in refusing to be marketed to I believe the benefits would be positive for all of society.
      - lucumo 17y ago
        > What does this have to do with advertising? Since when is advertsing equated with speech? The type of advertising blocked by Adblock is a form of unsolicited communication. You solicited it with your visit to the site. You didn't leave when confronted with the choice of using my site and viewing ads or leaving. If you don't like my ads, by all means: LEAVE.
        sho 17y ago
        You solicited my visit by putting your website on the internet and leading me there by some means. Now I'm going to view it on my own terms. If you don't like that, block me, or take down your site.
        axod 17y ago
        I'll block you thanks. Don't be surprised if your browsing experience starts to suck as more sites follow suit. Just like if I own a bookstore and you come in every day and read books and never buy anything. Pretty soon I'll ban you.
        enneff 17y ago
        Why so smug? You should know there's no way to possibly prevent people blocking your ads.
        lucumo 17y ago
        Sure. And if I'd opened a store and invited customers in, I was also inviting shop lifters. You know, because I solicited them by opening a store and leading them in by some means, so now they should use the store on their own terms. I invited genuine customers of course, not leeches.
        enneff 17y ago
        Actually, I made an HTTP request to the main page, and then selectively loaded the rest of the page. How can you possibly argue that it's somehow my moral responsibility to load a web page in it's entirety? It's a patently ridiculous notion, and if your business model cannot support people that do it you're fucked.
    - sho 17y ago
      "By using adblock, you're abusing trust." Nonsense! What trust? You put up a website, I visit it. If your whole operation is based upon the "trust" that I'm also going to view your ads - you've got another think coming. Anyway, I see it from the opposite angle. It was websites abusing my trust - that I would be able to view their content without being subjected to inane, distracting ads - that led me to this attitude in the first place. Adblock users were created, not born. "You're assuming the website you visit is going to be intrusive and horrible to you." This is an assumption born of long and miserable experience and I stand by its general accuracy. 75% rule! "You're putting your fingers in your ears and saying "Nothing you ever say to me is going to be useful to me"." If I knew someone IRL who spoke with the same abysmal signal-to-noise ratio of your average web advertising, that is exactly what I'd do. Or, rather, I'd wear some kind of filter so I couldn't hear them. You are constantly defending advertising in this forum - I have to wonder, are we using the same internet? 99.9% of the ads I see are awful. Punch the monkey. Win a PS3! Get your horoscope on your mobile! Repair your Windows registry! They are pure annoying noise. How can you possibly blame me for wanting to block them out? I have nothing against site owners; hell, I'm a site owner myself. If there was a more surgical way to easily block only the annoying ads, I'd adopt that. There is not, to my knowledge, so I block them all. I don't understand why you can't see that this is a perfectly reasonable reaction.
      - axod 17y ago
        Yes I think you're browsing a completely different internet. I rarely get irritated by adverts and find most of them interesting and useful. If not personally, definitely from a marketing and monetization point of view.
      - lucumo 17y ago
        > If I knew someone IRL who spoke with the same abysmal signal-to-noise ratio of your average web advertising, that is exactly what I'd do. Or, rather, I'd wear some kind of filter so I couldn't hear them. More likely that you would avoid the person all together. Do the same for websites and everyone is happy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

by griftah 17y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

sho 17y ago

It's not a "tragedy of the commons", it's the failure of private businesses to monetise their operations without pissing people off so much they go and install special software to avoid it. Big difference.

sho 17y ago
Instead of downmodding, maybe someone would like to point out how I'm wrong? We are talking about private for-profit web sites. They are not a shared public good like rivers, the air, or indeed the english "commons" of old.
- axod 17y ago
  By using adblock, you're abusing trust. You're assuming the website you visit is going to be intrusive and horrible to you. You're putting your fingers in your ears and saying "Nothing you ever say to me is going to be useful to me". It's anti-social, and if everyone did it, it'd be a horrible world. Imagine if you did that on a personal level - if someone started talking to you about a new movie they saw that they liked, and you instantly cover your ears so you can't hear them.
  - enneff 17y ago
    What does this have to do with advertising? Since when is advertsing equated with speech? The type of advertising blocked by Adblock is a form of unsolicited communication. Your analogy is a terrible one, by the way. A better one is picking up an ad-supported magazine, and asking a helpful friend (one whose judgement you trust - the parallel here being to the EasyList maintainers) to rip all the ads out for you before you read it. If people could block ads on TV and in print, prevent themselves from seeing billboards, etc, newsflash: they would! If I could go through my life without being subjected to people trying to sell me stuff all the time, I would be a much happier person. Just because we grew up in a world dominated by consumerism does not mean that's the way it should be, or the only way it can be. If more people were proactive in refusing to be marketed to I believe the benefits would be positive for all of society.
    - lucumo 17y ago
      > What does this have to do with advertising? Since when is advertsing equated with speech? The type of advertising blocked by Adblock is a form of unsolicited communication. You solicited it with your visit to the site. You didn't leave when confronted with the choice of using my site and viewing ads or leaving. If you don't like my ads, by all means: LEAVE.
      - sho 17y ago
        You solicited my visit by putting your website on the internet and leading me there by some means. Now I'm going to view it on my own terms. If you don't like that, block me, or take down your site.
        axod 17y ago
        I'll block you thanks. Don't be surprised if your browsing experience starts to suck as more sites follow suit. Just like if I own a bookstore and you come in every day and read books and never buy anything. Pretty soon I'll ban you.
        enneff 17y ago
        Why so smug? You should know there's no way to possibly prevent people blocking your ads.
        lucumo 17y ago
        Sure. And if I'd opened a store and invited customers in, I was also inviting shop lifters. You know, because I solicited them by opening a store and leading them in by some means, so now they should use the store on their own terms. I invited genuine customers of course, not leeches.
      - enneff 17y ago
        Actually, I made an HTTP request to the main page, and then selectively loaded the rest of the page. How can you possibly argue that it's somehow my moral responsibility to load a web page in it's entirety? It's a patently ridiculous notion, and if your business model cannot support people that do it you're fucked.
  - sho 17y ago
    "By using adblock, you're abusing trust." Nonsense! What trust? You put up a website, I visit it. If your whole operation is based upon the "trust" that I'm also going to view your ads - you've got another think coming. Anyway, I see it from the opposite angle. It was websites abusing my trust - that I would be able to view their content without being subjected to inane, distracting ads - that led me to this attitude in the first place. Adblock users were created, not born. "You're assuming the website you visit is going to be intrusive and horrible to you." This is an assumption born of long and miserable experience and I stand by its general accuracy. 75% rule! "You're putting your fingers in your ears and saying "Nothing you ever say to me is going to be useful to me"." If I knew someone IRL who spoke with the same abysmal signal-to-noise ratio of your average web advertising, that is exactly what I'd do. Or, rather, I'd wear some kind of filter so I couldn't hear them. You are constantly defending advertising in this forum - I have to wonder, are we using the same internet? 99.9% of the ads I see are awful. Punch the monkey. Win a PS3! Get your horoscope on your mobile! Repair your Windows registry! They are pure annoying noise. How can you possibly blame me for wanting to block them out? I have nothing against site owners; hell, I'm a site owner myself. If there was a more surgical way to easily block only the annoying ads, I'd adopt that. There is not, to my knowledge, so I block them all. I don't understand why you can't see that this is a perfectly reasonable reaction.
    - axod 17y ago
      Yes I think you're browsing a completely different internet. I rarely get irritated by adverts and find most of them interesting and useful. If not personally, definitely from a marketing and monetization point of view.
    - lucumo 17y ago
      > If I knew someone IRL who spoke with the same abysmal signal-to-noise ratio of your average web advertising, that is exactly what I'd do. Or, rather, I'd wear some kind of filter so I couldn't hear them. More likely that you would avoid the person all together. Do the same for websites and everyone is happy.