3 ms·

Most users would prefer if there would be no ads at all. I don't think putting ads in Firefox will reduce ads on websites.

by ama729 11y ago

vdaniuk 11y ago
>I don't think anybody care about the state of digital advertising except marketers. As I have demonstrated with a simple example, this statement is false. >Most users would prefer if there would be no ads at all. Your attempt at moving the goalposts is irrelevant. Therefore, your accusation of Mozilla being dishonest with their goals is not supported by your arguments.
- pgsandstrom 11y ago
  You are interpreting him too literally. What he meant was simply that it is obvious that Mozilla cares about income from their ads, not about the state of digital advertising.
  - vdaniuk 11y ago
    >What he meant was simply that it is obvious that Mozilla cares about income from their ads, not about the state of digital advertising Yes. I do not agree with this statement. Mozilla as an organization, as a collective of individuals and as a steward of interests of hundreds of millions of Mozilla products users has diverse and complex interests in the direction of evolution of digital advertising. These interests are not limited to the immediate profits.
  - lmorchard 11y ago
    Mozilla cares about funding itself, yes. But digital advertising is also how most of the web is funded - and Mozilla cares about that, too, because it directly impacts everything else under the Mozilla mission. As a user, you might prefer no ads when asked - but an enormous majority of people have endorsed the ad-supported free-of-charge model on the web through their daily actions. So, practically speaking, we have to find a way to deal with it and make it better.
lmorchard 11y ago
There's no such thing as a free lunch. The way to reduce ads on websites is to pay for websites. But, so far, that's proven less practical and acceptable to users than just putting up with the ads. But, ads are getting annoying and intrusive. So, if we're stuck with ads because folks won't pay, maybe it makes sense to try to make that situation better?

Most users would prefer if there would be no ads at all. I don't think putting ads in Firefox will reduce ads on websites.

by ama729 11y ago

Most users would prefer if there would be no ads at all. I don't think putting ads in Firefox will reduce ads on websites.

vdaniuk 11y ago

>I don't think anybody care about the state of digital advertising except marketers. As I have demonstrated with a simple example, this statement is false. >Most users would prefer if there would be no ads at all. Your attempt at moving the goalposts is irrelevant. Therefore, your accusation of Mozilla being dishonest with their goals is not supported by your arguments.

pgsandstrom 11y ago
You are interpreting him too literally. What he meant was simply that it is obvious that Mozilla cares about income from their ads, not about the state of digital advertising.
- vdaniuk 11y ago
  >What he meant was simply that it is obvious that Mozilla cares about income from their ads, not about the state of digital advertising Yes. I do not agree with this statement. Mozilla as an organization, as a collective of individuals and as a steward of interests of hundreds of millions of Mozilla products users has diverse and complex interests in the direction of evolution of digital advertising. These interests are not limited to the immediate profits.
- lmorchard 11y ago
  Mozilla cares about funding itself, yes. But digital advertising is also how most of the web is funded - and Mozilla cares about that, too, because it directly impacts everything else under the Mozilla mission. As a user, you might prefer no ads when asked - but an enormous majority of people have endorsed the ad-supported free-of-charge model on the web through their daily actions. So, practically speaking, we have to find a way to deal with it and make it better.

lmorchard 11y ago

There's no such thing as a free lunch. The way to reduce ads on websites is to pay for websites. But, so far, that's proven less practical and acceptable to users than just putting up with the ads. But, ads are getting annoying and intrusive. So, if we're stuck with ads because folks won't pay, maybe it makes sense to try to make that situation better?