4 ms·
I used to feel that blocking online ads was freeloading, but I am increasingly convinced that the online ads are a failed experiment and it's our duty to kill t
by skue 12y ago
I used to feel that blocking online ads was freeloading, but I am increasingly convinced that the online ads are a failed experiment and it's our duty to kill them -- especially when the industry can't even follow through on watered-down self-regulation like DNT.
The crazy thing is that major websites like Yahoo don't even know what ads they are serving. And increasingly online ads are an attack vector for viruses and malware. In January Yahoo was serving malware via their online ads.[1] And in February Google did the same.[2]
And of course there are the major privacy issues with companies tracking us online. I understand that online publishing is important and we clearly need a strong press, but publishing really needs to find a new business model. Online ads are not the solution.
[1]: http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/05/tech/yahoo-malware-attack/inde.. http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/05/tech/yahoo-malware-attack/inde....
[2]: http://labs.bromium.com/2014/02/21/the-wild-wild-web-youtube.. http://labs.bromium.com/2014/02/21/the-wild-wild-web-youtube....
- fortyseven 12y agoSure, kill them. I mean, as long as you realize that killing off online ads essentially means opting in to a future where quality content is forced behind a paywall as a matter of course. And I say this as someone who loathes advertising and the creepy mentality behind them. They're kind of necessary evil. Keeping a tighter rein on what kinds of ads can be served would help tremendously. They need to eradicate that stigma of them being a dangerous vector. Erf.
- jaachan 12y agoThen we can invent in a proper paywall, something that works unintrusively. And then users are the customers again, and we can get our internet back.