4 ms·

From their own website, https://adblockplus.org/blog/restating-the-obvious-adblocking-declared-legal https://adblockplus.org/blog/restating-the-obvious-adblocki

by mahouse 12y ago

From their own website, https://adblockplus.org/blog/restating-the-obvious-adblocking-declared-legal https://adblockplus.org/blog/restating-the-obvious-adblockin... > Now that the legalities are out of the way, we want to reach out to other publishers and advertisers and content creators and encourage them to work with Adblock Plus rather than against us. Let’s develop new forms of nonintrusive ads that are actually useful and welcomed by users; let’s discover ways to make better ads; let’s push forward to create a more sustainable Internet ecosystem for everyone. > You know where to reach us. This is not blackmailing. At all. :-)

TeMPOraL 12y ago
This is the kind of blackmailing I will support :). Advertisers are invaders, we (the consumers) have a right to push back. EDIT: I didn't know ABP is building a business out of paid whitelisting. I'll need to read more about that. I am, however, still fully supporting publishers being forced by all ad blockers to find a less malicious way of earning money.
- mahouse 12y ago
  How short-sighted.
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    Could you elaborate on why exactly is this short-sighted?
    - mahouse 12y ago
      You don't care about that blackmailing, but you will probably start caring when publishers start paying AdBlock cash so they show their ads.
      - TeMPOraL 12y ago
        I've read some other comments; I didn't realize that ABP is building a sort of "pay me to show ads" business. This is something I don't like and I will re-evaluate my position on this particular piece of software. I am, however, still supporting the proliferation of ad blockers in general, and forcing publishers to find ways to earn money that don't involve forcing crap down people's throats.
        mahouse 12y ago
        Of course. I support that view. Switch to uBlock. 😉
      - ordinary 12y ago
        Right now, you can avoid that fate by unticking one checkbox. I'll start caring when that checkbox disappears. But even in that (currently entirely hypothetical) scenario, I genuinely don't understand why people are so scared of AdBlock Plus abusing its position. This isn't Facebook, there is almost no lock-in. The principle behind adblockers allows many different applications to use the same filter subscriptions. Several alternatives already exist, and they will only multiply when AdBlock Plus starts alienating its users (which can, currently seems to, but needn't overlap with its customers). So what is there to worry about?
      - frenchy 12y ago
        The advertisers can not win this one. We can just switch to another fork of AdBlock (or make an new one).
alexqgb 12y ago
How is this blackmailing? Strictly speaking, blackmailing involves using knowledge of someone else's transgressions against them (e.g. "Pay me $1,000 if you don't want me to show your wife these pictures of you having an affair.") I don't see anything close to that happening here. I mean, AdBlock isn't saying "Pay us to serve your shitty ad". They're saying "Pay us to ensure that your ad meets the high standards of our users, in which case we'll see that it's delivered." Big, big difference. Like a lot of people, I'm not adverse to ad-supoorted content in principle. And I recognize that smaller sites can't have dedicated ad-sales units, and need to rely on ad networks to connect their audiences with advertisers. Unfortunately, this means giving up a lot of quality control, and that ends up producing a crappy experience for readers - who then resort to AdBlock, which degrades the value of the Internet as an ad platform for non-horrible advertisers. This downward spiral is part of the reason that print outlets can charge so much more for the same reach online. AdBlock Plus seems to fix all three problems at once. By applying some reasonable criteria as to what is an isn't a horrible ad (to say nothing of crap infected with malware), it makes it easy for me to filter out the worst ad networks, and only engage with the ones that enforce some basic standards. Assuming that ABP gets widely adopted, they provide a great way to drive the worst offenders out of business, leading to a world where sites and advertisers gravitate to the networks that offer the highest penetration. In essence, ABP is a buyer's agent, with the buyer being the reader and the currency being their attention. And thanks to the efficiency of my agent, I don't have to waste my time rejecting the crappiest bids. At the same time, I can participate in the ad-supported model (which I frankly prefer to paying cash). With less crap in the mix, this model actually becomes increasingly beneficial to sites as online ad-rates increase. Far from something noxious like blackmailing, ABP seems like a fundamentally civilizing influence. The gold standard in all of this is Vogue, and specifically, their September Issue, which would actually be worth less is the absence of all the ads. And yes, you better believe those ads are heavily vetted by the magazine. In a world with competing blockers / coaches, the agent who gets closest to this mark wins.

by mahouse 12y ago

TeMPOraL 12y ago

This is the kind of blackmailing I will support :). Advertisers are invaders, we (the consumers) have a right to push back. EDIT: I didn't know ABP is building a business out of paid whitelisting. I'll need to read more about that. I am, however, still fully supporting publishers being forced by all ad blockers to find a less malicious way of earning money.

mahouse 12y ago
How short-sighted.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  Could you elaborate on why exactly is this short-sighted?
  - mahouse 12y ago
    You don't care about that blackmailing, but you will probably start caring when publishers start paying AdBlock cash so they show their ads.
    - TeMPOraL 12y ago
      I've read some other comments; I didn't realize that ABP is building a sort of "pay me to show ads" business. This is something I don't like and I will re-evaluate my position on this particular piece of software. I am, however, still supporting the proliferation of ad blockers in general, and forcing publishers to find ways to earn money that don't involve forcing crap down people's throats.
      - mahouse 12y ago
        Of course. I support that view. Switch to uBlock. 😉
    - ordinary 12y ago
      Right now, you can avoid that fate by unticking one checkbox. I'll start caring when that checkbox disappears. But even in that (currently entirely hypothetical) scenario, I genuinely don't understand why people are so scared of AdBlock Plus abusing its position. This isn't Facebook, there is almost no lock-in. The principle behind adblockers allows many different applications to use the same filter subscriptions. Several alternatives already exist, and they will only multiply when AdBlock Plus starts alienating its users (which can, currently seems to, but needn't overlap with its customers). So what is there to worry about?
    - frenchy 12y ago
      The advertisers can not win this one. We can just switch to another fork of AdBlock (or make an new one).

alexqgb 12y ago

How is this blackmailing? Strictly speaking, blackmailing involves using knowledge of someone else's transgressions against them (e.g. "Pay me $1,000 if you don't want me to show your wife these pictures of you having an affair.") I don't see anything close to that happening here. I mean, AdBlock isn't saying "Pay us to serve your shitty ad". They're saying "Pay us to ensure that your ad meets the high standards of our users, in which case we'll see that it's delivered." Big, big difference. Like a lot of people, I'm not adverse to ad-supoorted content in principle. And I recognize that smaller sites can't have dedicated ad-sales units, and need to rely on ad networks to connect their audiences with advertisers. Unfortunately, this means giving up a lot of quality control, and that ends up producing a crappy experience for readers - who then resort to AdBlock, which degrades the value of the Internet as an ad platform for non-horrible advertisers. This downward spiral is part of the reason that print outlets can charge so much more for the same reach online. AdBlock Plus seems to fix all three problems at once. By applying some reasonable criteria as to what is an isn't a horrible ad (to say nothing of crap infected with malware), it makes it easy for me to filter out the worst ad networks, and only engage with the ones that enforce some basic standards. Assuming that ABP gets widely adopted, they provide a great way to drive the worst offenders out of business, leading to a world where sites and advertisers gravitate to the networks that offer the highest penetration. In essence, ABP is a buyer's agent, with the buyer being the reader and the currency being their attention. And thanks to the efficiency of my agent, I don't have to waste my time rejecting the crappiest bids. At the same time, I can participate in the ad-supported model (which I frankly prefer to paying cash). With less crap in the mix, this model actually becomes increasingly beneficial to sites as online ad-rates increase. Far from something noxious like blackmailing, ABP seems like a fundamentally civilizing influence. The gold standard in all of this is Vogue, and specifically, their September Issue, which would actually be worth less is the absence of all the ads. And yes, you better believe those ads are heavily vetted by the magazine. In a world with competing blockers / coaches, the agent who gets closest to this mark wins.