Wired will soon begin blocking people who use Adblocking software...as

I don't block ads, I just choose not to request them

WOW IT'S ALMOST AS IF I DON'T CARE AT ALL

Everyone has switched to ublock OP

File: 1291357998098.jpg (63KB, 471x462px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 471x462px

>Going to wired.com for any reason whatsoever

>>52882299
Guess I wont be using wired anymore

>Implying I've ever been to that crap
>Implying I'll ever want to go to that crap
>Implying I couldn't just block their adblock block

>capitalizing domain names

For what purpose?

>>52882299
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVXJmfd3cmg

Never even heard of that site so whatever

>>52882332
>>52882348
>>52882349
>>52882368

You make me proud anon.

>>52882299
>WIRED
literally WHO?

File: Screenshot (269).png (665KB, 2560x1312px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 2560x1312px

People actually go to this trash?
top kek

>wahhh let our malware serving ads through

I'm sure the standard anti-anti-adblock lists will have this sorted out inside of a week.

File: pop-up-ads.jpg (182KB, 600x279px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 600x279px

I cant wait for the average webpage to look like this

File: Capture.png (28KB, 1315x129px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1315x129px

"ok"

>>52882441
This.

Adblocking is a security measure. I wouldn't mind ads if they were unable to compromise my system.

>>52882299
>we will keep the ads as "polite" as we can
If this was true they wouldn't need to block ABP, they would just have to get their website whitelisted.
https://eyeo.com/acceptable-ads-application.html
https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=12

>>52882441
niceme.me

>>52882515
>they would just have to get their website whitelisted.

That costs a lot of money.

>>52882299
into the trash it goes.

>>52882299
Good luck with that. It worked so great on other sites that tried to stop AD blocking.

>>52882299
>oh noes i cant view wired.com
and nothing of value was lost

>>52882299
>This is good. Websites should protect themselves from people who think they should get content without doing something in retard.

>doing something in retard

>in retard

I'm surprised no one saw this

File: 04d580a.jpg (69KB, 400x265px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 400x265px

H-how dare you block our browser fucking ads
you are the mosnter, s-so what if they have malware are are extremely intrusive and slow your browser to a crawl. there is a living human being behind that ad that need your money.
JUST DEAL WITH IT

>>52882518
Fuck off. That shit happens all the time.

A year ago Germany's most prominent weather prediction website was compromised for weeks and infected tens of thousands through "ads".
I only got through it safe because of adblocking.

>>52882518
http://www.wired.com/insights/2014/11/malvertising-is-cybercriminals-latest-sweet-spot/
>You could also think about running an ad blocker
Top kek

File: rebel-without-a-cause.jpg (842KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

842KB, 1024x768px

>>52882299
There's literally no method of blocking ad blocking that can't be bypassed with an ad blocker. I don't want to visit their shitty site anyway, but I'll go there and disable their countermeasures just for funsies when they implement them.

Forbes already tries this and there's already custom filters to get around it.

>>52882299
this insane mindset that people rather put up with malware-ads than not visit them at all... remarkable.

>we're gonna rape the fuck out of you with ads
>WAH, don't block our raping mechanism
>OR you can pay 1$/week so we don't rape you

How about no

I mean i wasn't even visiting that shitty site but now i will have a reason not to go there

>>52882529
> Here are some details regarding the fees:
>Only large entities have to pay. We qualify an entity as large when it gains more than 10 million additional ad impressions per month due to participation in the Acceptable Ads initiative.
>For these entities, our licensing fee normally represents 30 percent of the additional revenue created by whitelisting its acceptable ads.
>Therefore, a few very large entities who take part in the Acceptable Ads initiative compensate Eyeo for its services. Eyeo's services are provided free of charge to all other participants (roughly 90%).

>adblocked --->0.00000000$
>whitlisted adblocker ---> 70% $ of a normal user without adblock

File: how_about_no.png (29KB, 276x913px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 276x913px

I hope you guys area aware they're going to block NoScript-users, too.

>>52882655

Well since most websites are pretty much broken if you don't enable half of the scripts on page, I'd say NoScript et. al. are already blocked.

>>52882299
>For $1 a week, you will get complete access to our content, with no display advertising or ad tracking.
That's entirely reasonable, and I'd be on board if I gave a shit about Wired. Can't remember the last time I've been there.

apparently the next step is to make articles that are actually ads

>>52882733
using noscript for years now and have no problem i tried umatrix but It takes more time for me to unblock shit with the matrix style so I use noscript.

>>52882733
got plenty of sites which show anti-adblocking-shit when running noscript but not running an adblocker just because noscript blocks all dynamic ad-loading-scripts.

ah well, a cleansing of the market isn't a bad idea anyway.

>>52882477

It already does. Intelligent people don't see it however.

>>52882773

That's already rampant. Is that your point?

>>52882299
Doesn't matter, Wired became shit after they redesigned the layout anyway, and I stopped reading it.

They want to be dumbasses and drive away all their traffic instead of using decent, non-invasive advertising?

Go ahead, commit sudoko, no one gives a shit.

>>52882299
1. Nobody gives a flying fuck about wired.
2. They did it in right way. Giving you the option to pay for the content.

>Internet content
>video steaming sites have the ability to show their ads on the side of their content without issue
>start showing ads right inside of their videos for no reason
>have to wait 15seconds to watch content because i assume "TV DOES IT SO WE SHOULD ALSO"

The faster AD based web sites die the better.

>>52882420
It used to be a respectable tech site, before the current redesign into a turd. Look it up on the Internet Archive.

>>52882593
don't forget about uselessly consumed bandwidth on shitty data capped cell plans.

>>52882800
not really a point and more of a "i remember reading this somewhere"

i havent actually seen one of those ad articles tho

>>52882773
>the next step
Actually a "real" adblocker would block the whole page on most sites.

>visiting WIRED in the first place

>>52882818
>>52882818
why would I ever want to pay for clickbait and paid ad "articel"?

>>52882299
And after linking the site on /g/, it spiked to 99%, but your ad revenue increased slightly because of the small number of idiots without.

Nobody cares, go shill somewhere else.

>>52882299
But what is I use a terminal text based browser that doesn't have JavaScript and can't display images?
How is it my fault?

>>52882884
Well yeah, if the website is so bad, it doesn't deserve the money from ads.

i guess the other sites havent gone full ad articles because then every other user will just go to another site that doesn't have fake articles

so they probably want some sort of monopoly to corner the market first, or something

Grandpa here.

Internet worked just fine in pre-commercial phase, there was ton of relevant info on every field made by enthusiasts that asked nothing in return.

In my opinion nothing would be lost if cancerous sites like wired and gawker media with their pseudo writers and editors cease to exist.

>>52882420
It's like they made the mobile version the same as the desktop because they were too lazy to redesign both.

> we do all we can to write vital stories
> vital stories
> vital

>>52882789
>Intelligent people don't see it however.

Im sure you are such a smartass for blocking ads

>>52882655
I hate when sites load megabytes of javascript that have no visible impact on the site, other than to slow everything down.

>>52882789
it's sad that you consider installing a plugin some sort of mental feat.

I will soon begin not reading Wired... Oh wait I already do that.

>>52882988
>∀x∈people: x is intelligent ⇒ x blocks ads
>not equivalent with
>∀x∈people: x blocks ads ⇒ x is intelligent

>>52882299
now the next step is displaying a warning before you click a link to a cancerous site like that.

>>52882655
hey just wanna ask a lil question
how is noscript better than umatrix? noscript just blocks the scripts, umatrix prevents the whole connection (i think). and with a little tinkering you can make umatrix the ultimate addon that manages cookies, blocks everything (including ads) and changes your useragent.

>>52882917
The absolute truth, I remember when running a site was a hobby and you would visit many different sites with different layouts and content based on the topic you wanted to browse. Now days people visit very few websites, sad times indeed.

>>52882512
and if they were not a matter of taking a 20 KiB site to a total size of 2 MiB

File: 1443442373299.gif (1MB, 290x189px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 290x189px

>>52882299
>WIRED
Good riddance.

Wired mattered back in the nineties maybe. Might as well be an article about Fast Company.

>>52883101
uMatrix is far superior at blocking as you pointed out. The only thing NoScript does better is blocking XSS on whitelisted sites, and ABE. If you want the best of both it is easy to set it up so NoScript doesn't manage anything but these features, and uMatrix manages script blocking. Though this is overkill for many.

Soon:
>AOL to block all users who don't use their browser.

>>52882821

Websites, especially ones with a lot of traffic, don't run on fairy dust and unicorn farts. They require revenue from somewhere. The only alternative to advertising is making people pay out of pocket for it.

So, pick your poison, retard.

>>52882299
i don't see why people argue over this
the end user chooses exactly what they want to view or not, it is absolutely none of their business.
i can also tear out the advertisements in the newspaper and they can't do shit about it, this is the same except on a digital level

Shilling aside, im wondering whats gonna happen first, either they give up and stop blocking adblock users or other webs do the same shit and it becomes a standard.

>>52883147
not him, but why uMatrix over uo

and is there anything that lets me have granular control of scripts on whitelisted sites?

>>52882332
S A V A G E
A
V
A
G
E

>>52883162
I would gladly pay $1/mo or something for quality content. Problem is they change the price or the quality of content goes down, trying to cancel your subscription is like pulling teeth. They make it anything but easy to cancel that shit.

>>52883173
Wired is hardly the first site to attempt this. There are filters to block these scripts that are updated much like regular adblock rules.

>>52882299
If I even used this site, I'd just block javascript from now on lmao

File: 1920857120385712035.jpg (38KB, 390x470px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 390x470px

UBlock Origin/NoScript masterrace. Is this the begining of the downfall of online advertisement?

>>52883197
why not ublock origin + umatrix?

>>52882299
>wired
never heard of that website before desu. IDGAF

>>52883177
more features

>>52883162
Run your own advertising that only allows image banners with an <a href> tag. No scripts, no cookies, just an image banner. For video sites splice a 10 - 15 second video clip at the beginning if the video is over 5 minutes long.

Advertising isn't an issue as long as it isn't malicious or bogs down the site.

>>52882857
That's the thing. You have.

>>52883173
They will give in, because advertisements are determined by how many pages views they have per day/week/month/etc. Even if it's the 20% they claim it to be, which it most likely is way higher than that. That is a HUGE drop in page views.

>>52882322
First reply on point, as always.

It's like going to an all-you-can-eat buffet, and the owners insisting you eat equal portions of all the buffet items. Fuck off, I'll take the parts I like and leave the rest.

>>52883230
Even a link can still lead to malicious content. What the malware spreaders do is change the link contents after a week, long after anyone is checking to see if it's malicious.

You could prob. get around this by requiring all ad links to not be retarded redirects and lead directly to whatever site is advertising, and make a script that auto-checks the link contents every few hours.

File: Bildschirmfoto von »2016-02-09 16:12:09«.png (365KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1366x768px

>>52882299
lmao. what a cancerous website. How many js do they have that harvest data? Holy fuck man.

>>52882299
But Wired, I already whitelist all *.jpg and *.png ads. You don't need javascript or flash to advertise to me.

A lot of people on wired that didn't know about adblockers are now made aware of them.

File: Screenshot_39.jpg (218KB, 1388x767px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1388x767px

>>52882943
>mobile site
>10.2mb page weight
>40 second initial pageload
>not including the fucking 7mb mp4 that they have you download

This is not including ads.

Forget adblock, there needs to be an extension that just blocks this site.

File: giphy.gif (443KB, 400x296px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 400x296px

>companies literally have to beg for our mercy because they can't adapt
>our approach to business isn't working, it's the customer's fault, the customer must change his ways

>>52882363

single handedly ridding the internet of cancer like wired.com

>ushering a new age of paid content
>ads lose strength
>seems good to me besides the evolving ads problem. like using too much hand sanitizer, we're building super ads

do I use unblock or ublock origin?

>>52883247
More like
>here's our buffet, it's totally free!
>Oh and for payment you have eat this bowl of shit, since the neighbour pays us for seeing people eat shit

>>52882299
>wired
who reads that shit

>>52883312
This.
There needs to be a lot less corporate death grip on the internet.

reminder that they may be able to detect ad blockers but they will not be able to detect a hosts file. if you absolutely must use shitty websites like wired, use dan pollock's hosts file.

>>52883357
You know, i seriously wonder who the fuck wakes up in the morning, and says "Fuck Yiss, lets read Wired!"

Or all of those gaming sites, wtf with that

>wired
who?

>>52883353
Origin.

>>52882299
who cares

>>52883419
They will set up a seperate ad server with a unique IP and if it doesn't see any requests to it from your IP at the same time you are requesting content from their main IP, bam. Adblock detected.

>>52883460
So ad hiders > ad blockers? I remember back when "it just hides the ads!" was a legitimate reason to shit on an adblocker.

>>52883197
>>52883222
I just run Ublock Origin desu.

>implying I've ever whitelisted a site in my life

I've been on 4chan since 2005 and still never whitelisted this shithole

these websites make more than enough money

>>52883295
What program is that, anon?

>>52882299
I literally dont know what wired.com even is, but i wont turn of my ad-blocker for anything.

The Internet with ads is a terrible place.

>>52883492
I only whitelist this shithole, nyaa, and a few scanlators. A little banner is fine when it doesn't take more than a third of the visible page.

>>52883512
>nyaa

I don't have them whitelisted but for some reason the j-list ads all display anyway.

>>52883533
Nyaa self-hosts their ads and they regularly change the names of the images

>>52882299
>you can use the road as long as you pay attention to the billboards on the side of it.

Don't work like that get fukt m8.

File: Capture.jpg (8KB, 44x40px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 44x40px

>go to wired
>see this
There are people who are literally defending sites like these.

>>52883533
I bought stupid shit off j-list after seeing their retarded meme filled ads. Zero regrets.

>>52882771
>That's entirely reasonable
It really isn't. Imagine you have to pay $1 a month for every site you visit. You will either reduce your internet experience to 25 sites at most or become poor pretty quickly.

>>52883493
Chrome. Press ctrl-shift-I to get the dev tools.

>>52883541
>literally 2 non intrusive static images
I don't mind this, if you have to have ads, this is how to do it.

>>52883593
Some sites are doing X free articles per month, that sounds like a good tradeoff if you only visit a lot of sites infrequently.

>>52882623
Oh, I'll have to search for that. Wasn't really aware. I had been resorting to archive.is to read select forbes pages, which isn't exactly convenient.


>>52883263
Like pretty much 99% of all media websites. They just get worse and worse.

>>52883162
>what is free and open source

File: 18fuckingdomains.png (7KB, 161x366px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 161x366px

>>52883584
There's at least 18 domains as well. If I dared to unblock one of them I'd probably be connected to like 10 more too.

>>52883607
I mean the thing on the left side.

>>52883607
I mean that thing on the left side.

File: SGF-Hipster.jpg (23KB, 276x186px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 276x186px

>>52882299
>wired
and nothing of value was lost

also
>they think they can actually block ppl using ublock
aren't they supposed to be a tech site? you'd think they would know that's impossible

>>52883639

>Thinks free and open sources applies to server bandwidth costs.

Yes, you can ask for donations, but someone looking to consistently operate and grow cannot rely on donations reliably.

>>52882789
>setup ublock for my dad
>get call the next day
>its like i'm browsing the internet back in the 90s this is fucking awesome

the more we get our parents on the bandwagon the more people realize they need to change their fucking game

also

>$50 a year for reading shitty articles
fucking wow

>>52882857
Just read any The Verge article

File: webdesign.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

Why can't sites just be readable and lightweight anymore with maybe a static banner ad or two at most?

>>52883805
Wait until you get the awkward call asking hoe to turn it off because some "video" site does not work at 1:00am.

File: 1405716935830.jpg (20KB, 456x354px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 456x354px

>>52883777
>tfw ur website isnt worth the bandwidth it uses

File: 1442212181958.png (26KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x300px

i dont want their ads, i dont want their content

>>52883805
My parents probably don't even realize what the actual internet looks like anymore. They've used firefox + an adblocker for years. I switched them over to protect them from malware the cosmetic filtering is an additional and very useful side effect

>>52883733
>>52883733
>>they think they can actually block ppl using ublock
>aren't they supposed to be a tech site? you'd think they would know that's impossible
They're probably counting on most of their ad blocking readers not knowing that and they're probably right.

>implying i visit wired anyways

>nothing _of_importance_was_lost.png

>>52882299
You're the kind of fucking asshole who would accept tracking devices and a killswitch in return for neuro implants.

>>52883263
> wired
> takes 11 seconds to finish loading all that crap
> keeps sending requests infinitely containing the words "ping", "ad", "track"
> connections to several dozens of third party domains
why
this is not how it's supposed to be

>>52883813
That site is great but CSS can be useful for creating and managing light themes.

Javascript can be good if used sparingly. Reinventing the scroll wheel is not a productive use of javascript(fucking TIME magazine)

AD SUPPORTED CONTENT IS NATURALLY LOW-QUALITY

Content is worth as much as the customer gives up in return. If the user gives up nothing tangible, the content is worth nothing tangible, and creators unknowingly let their standard drop because they do not receive less traffic (and therefore ad revenue) in return for worse content.

If people have to pay to see something or not get it at all, they will hold it to a higher standard and the creator will therefore create higher quality content (in the context of their userbase) or suffer.

Just look at all this "we do it for free" content that's ad supported. It's all shit like sponsored "technology" blogs and youtube vloggers that have never held real jobs outside of front desk customer service.

>>52883593
Not him but it's one DOLLAR. That's around the cost of a pack of crisps at tesco. Most people could afford to pay 25 times that weekly without noticing an impact.

>>52882299
If you get up and walk out of a room, or change the channel during TV commercials, no one cares. No one tells their viewers they have to watch the ads or not get the show. They just play the ads and get what they can get.
Websites need to grow up.

>>52883962
It's a hyperbole to make a point, it says so on the final line of the screencap.

IMO 4chan has about the perfect amount of things going on. Simple layout and color scheme, banner ad on top and bottom of page, a few settings and features, looks good on almost any device.

>>52883997
>paying 52 dollars a year for content you get for free elsewhere

>>52883997
Think not of the cost to yourself, but the kinds of insufferable faggots you are providing with financial support. You have money, they don't. Keep it that way.

>>52882299
Anti-Adblock Killer.

>previous year + 40 days and people still read wired

why?

>>52883642
>>52883725
Its still Chrome.

https://developers.google.com/web/tools/chrome-devtools/iterate/device-mode/?hl=en

>>52884104
>2^11 + (2^5)i^2
>still reading

>>52884058
That's still nothing, less than I pay for a taxi after a night out.
>>52884063
I wasn't addressing that point, I was simply pointing out that a single monopoly money dollar per month was absolutely negligible. I don't read Wired, last time I did I was stuck at Heathrow in a blizzard and the cover of the magazine looked interesting. It's completely devoid of actual content. Still doesn't change the fact that a dollar is nothing.

>>52884063
kek'd because it's true

http://www.hrc.wmin.ac.uk/theory-californianideology-main.html

read it and weep motherfuckers

>You can subscribe to a brand-new Ad-Free version of WIRED.com. For $1 a week, you will get complete access to our content, with no display advertising or ad tracking.


You know you can a physical magazine sub to wired for $5/year right ?

>>52882299
Just as with drm, people will get around it literally overnight. The only ones who are going to be fucked by it are the ones who are not trying to get around it. Companies need to figure out a legitimate alternative, rather than clinging stubbornly to an antiquated system, that is only going to become more antiquated.

The MPAA and RIAA have been fighting against change for years now, and it's only served to hurt their bottom line. It sure as fuck hasn't stopped file sharing. The lesson to be learned from it is that you not only change with the times, but lead the way, or someone else will. The MPAA and RIAA wanted to continue distributing movies and music via traditional means whereas consumers wanted a cheaper and more convenient solution. They twiddled their thumbs while third-parties like Napster gave people the alternative they demanded, and it's completely fucked them in the process. Well, tough shit.

>>52883492
Wasn't this shithole serving up malicious ads recently?

>online ads = steal money from it's users
users spend a lot of time clicking through web content, but do they get any compensation for watching the ads? NO. Wired is just going to grab all money from itself & neglect to compensate the userbase, who's responsible from generating those incomes

>>52884291
yeah and the nyaa self hosted ads try to XSS your ass too

>>52884189
It's negligible to you, but repeated five hundred times over, it means some faggot at wired can continue contributing nothing to society except hosting a server and buying cheap ramen.

>>52884220
not even sarcastic, but why would i want to get the deadwood version of fast/minor news?

anyways, I've said it time and time again.

They brought this onto themselves, for years they made ads more and more obnoxious and intrusive while they made money from it.

The people caught up in this are the sites that run simple ads for money, they will be hurt the most.

>>52882299

Ads are a major security threat.

Fucking youtube even had bitlocker in their ads at one point.

I wont unblock ads for any site, not even my beloved 4chan with its very small and unobtrusive ads, and especially not for a shithole news site packed full of annoying as fuck ads.

>>52884287
>The only ones who are going to be fucked by it are the ones who are not trying to get around it.
They're making the adverts less intrusive to lure in adblock users, how is that screwing over the people who don't use adblock at all? If anything, it's making the service better for them too.
>Unrelated rant about filesharing and napster
What does that have to do with anything?!?

>>52884330
I assume because their physical sub gives you access online to digital stuff ?
Also because some people just want to read magazine leisurely, like really it only comes out once per month, its not breaking news stuff just some interesting articles here and there.

Time to use donations or sell merchandise

>>52884354
ehh, it's not really for me, but fair enough

just seems sort of pointless to me esp when it comes to tech, by the time you see it in magazines it's probably old news and you'd probably end up being more informed about it via googling

like i'd get a magazine if i was stuck in a place, but i think most people would opt for mucking on their cellphones

>>52883162

So if they can't get enough people willing to pay the $1 fee, then they don't deserve to exist. Free market will the problem (and the problem is that all these shitty for-profit click-bait news sites exist in the first place).

Besides, they could just put on way cheaper servers if they just served normal HTML and CSS instead of 1gb of scripts and ads for every page load.

>>52883476
>So ad hiders > ad blockers? I remember back when "it just hides the ads!" was a legitimate reason to shit on an adblocker.
No, because you will then be blasted with malware, it will just be hidden.

>>52882299
>>52882348
Isn't WIRED just shilling latest maymay tech toys for buyfags?

I like their shiny IRL printed magazines though, but stupid import prices.

>>52883295
Webkit happened , anon. This is what you get for bowing down to Google/NSA overlords.

fuck all ads

>>52883295
that's why you should just get the WIRED Magazine app on the itunes store!

>>52884512
Most of these sites are just article ads like the verge. And the articles that aren't shilling something are only regurgitated crap that is on hundreds of other news aggregators, so yeah.

File: Screenshot (271).png (431KB, 2560x1372px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 2560x1372px

Kek'd

>>52884748
try one with noscript enabled please

>>52883813
http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/

>>52883862
This.

* wired.com * block

Fuck them.

File: Capture.png (17KB, 470x286px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 470x286px

>>52884756
Don't have NoScript on Chrome so here's with uMatrix.

>>52884212
>one narrow column with tiny text
I am weeping, yes.

File: hory shet.png (599B, 25x28px) Image search: [Google]

599B, 25x28px

Why is this allowed?

>>52884911
I get that amount from 5min youtube session, kinda sad.

>>52882348
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcnArbdu0bE

they should see what happened to Ars Technica when it pulled shit like this

>wired
Drivel written by technically illiterate monkeys
Hopefully that site and all others like it perish without their beloved ad revenue.

File: Bildschirmfoto von »2016-02-09 18:28:56«.png (523KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

523KB, 1366x768px

>>52883263
If anyone wonders what the fuck is going on on this website

30+ scripts. not even kidding. I had to allow the scripts on this website multiple times because it kept adding more and more. Loading that pos with ublock disabled and all scripts running felt like 2 seconds. Fucking hell.

>>52884924
That's pretty much what I just did to get that number. Just a few fucking videos.

I mean what the fuck, it seems like most of the internet nowadays is ads and bloat with only a small fraction being actual content.

How did we let this happen?

>$52 a year
>more than fucking xbox live
yeah no thanks i just won't read your shitty magazine

>>52884911
>using regular ublock
Yeah, why is that allowed?

>>52882614
>http://www.wired.com/insights/2014/11/malvertising-is-cybercriminals-latest-sweet-spot/

no, seriously, this needs to be taken advantage of some way.

>>52885055
>/lgbt/
guys, we've found one!

File: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.png (77KB, 1250x66px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1250x66px

>>52885095
oh you'll love me

>>52882299
>Without doing something in retard
>in retard
Keked

Also, what the fuck are you on about? If you're in it for money and to pay employees, you need to offer an actual service. Not a fucking clickbait website that provides menial entertainment. That's what magazines are for. release your own magazine on the playstore for 2.99 a month and be done with it. Don't force people to pay for your free content or not to enter the website at all.

This meme needs to died.

>>52885133
>e621
mah nigga

>People honestly defend not paying for something that gives them value

Thieves.

File: shill.jpg (2KB, 80x80px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 80x80px

>>52882299
>This is good. Websites should protect themselves from people who think they should get content without doing something in retard.

>>52885184
>wired
>value
phys.org is value, wired is just another site endlessly reproducing shitty articles for ad revenue.

>>52885184
I hope you guys are still around when 3D printers take off. I can imagine the worldwide butthurt when people share designs and everybody prints their cars.

>>52885217
>implying BigCorp ltc. lobbyists won't just slip a few big ones under the table to make them illegal while also spreading FUD regarding their safety, etc.

It's like a rapist complaining that they got sent to prison

I don't block ads on sites that actually need the revenue and don't use ads to mine data or interrupt browsing.
e.g. 4chan
Wired can go fuck itself.

There are a handful of websites I would actually pay for. Wired ain't one of them. Thankfully most of the rest are giving their content away. I do actually pay for WarNerd's podcast though.

>>52885055
turning off noscript and pausing ghostery i get 29 trackers.

twenty fucking nine trackers.

File: wired_full_of_shit01.jpg (129KB, 929x617px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 929x617px

>makes article outlining the dangers of ad-delivered malware, recommends ad-blocking.
>gets mad because people use ad-blockers.

>>52885204
except value is subjective here. if someone is going to the site regularly and reading the articles then it obviously provides them value

>>52885409
theyre not asking you not to use adblocking anywhere, just to whitelist their site. if youre on a sketchy site then keep that shit on

File: wired_full_of_shit02.jpg (104KB, 882x479px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 882x479px

>>52885409

and not just one article, two of them.

>>52885461
Ads in general are sketchy. Unless they're self-hosted there's no guarantee that the ad is actually legit or not ad networks get compromised very frequently.

>>52885217
Good luck with that m8. New 3d printers will be DRM'd. Microsoft is even pushing a new 3d printing file format that supports drm

>>52885487
LINUX WILL FIND A WAY

>>52882299
>There will be two easy options to access that content.
Right, number 1 is using an anti-anti-adblocker script (which exists and works fine) or number 2, never visit this shithole again.

I guess I want that 90% of people never visit it again and the last 10% shall use method 1.

>>52882299
Good. I dont read that shit anyway

>>52885487
Not if you build them yourself m8.

>>52885461
>sketchy site
Wired seems sketchy to me, judging by the amount of trackers. They don't seem very picky when it comes to ads.

File: 1449874464233.jpg (54KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 400x400px

>>52885461

that's about as self serving as it gets.

"oh noes, teh ads aer full of teh malwaers!!!11 Blok teh ad siets with ad blokar 2000!!!1 But nots our site, don't blok our ad filled siets or you can't reads it" - JeffK, Editor in Chief of Wired.

>>52885505
Well good luck building an advanced 3d printer yourself. Something that can print a car is gonna need some pretty serious tech.

>>52885589
Those kinds of 3D printers are still inaccessible to the average consumer. Something that can print plastics isn't all that hard to build.

>>52885589
>advanced 3d printer
did you mean: auto lathe

this is what will happen the second you turn off your adblocker on wired

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160111/05574633295/forbes-site-after-begging-you-turn-off-adblocker-serves-up-steaming-pile-malware-ads.shtml

http://www.extremetech.com/internet/220696-forbes-forces-readers-to-turn-off-ad-blockers-promptly-serves-malware

Holy shit, wired still exists.

>>52883640
If close to 50% of the website is devoted to AD's, you have failed as a company

>>52885736

The magazine is still being published too. Saw one on the rack at the grocery store about a month or so ago.

>>52884790
>http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/

that site blows and dose nothing more than waste screen space
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
all web sites need to look like the wikipedia front page (without the jimmy wales i want your money bullshit)

>>52883805
ITT people butthurt that a website they don't even browse is blocking users that don't pay for their content

>>52883162
Maybe you shouldn't use 100Mb of Javascript, CSS, pictures and fonts for a website that is basically digital newspaper? Internet is much cheaper than it was 10 years ago.

>let us shove a ton of shit down your throat or give us money

Guess Wired can go fuck itself.

I've never even willingly accessed that website anyway.

File: Connex-260.png (604KB, 1151x700px) Image search: [Google]

604KB, 1151x700px

>>52885619
And when they do become accessible to consumers they will be DRM'd as fuck

>>52885660
Was thinking more like pic related or fucking nanomachines

>"Hey, you have adblock installed! Please think of the content creators and whitelist us!"
>Whitelist site
>"Hey, you have adblock installed!"

NIGGA I JUST WHITELISTED YOU, I'M NOT GOING TO UNINSTALL IT YOU FUCKING MONGOLOID WEBDEV. FUCK.

>>52885836
/thread

>>52883107
The problem really started when those ancient proto-bloggers decided they deserved to be paid to do their hobby. It all went downhill from there.

>>52883584
Jesus no wonder they need ads, looks like one visitors gets them ad revenue for a years operation.

File: Choose+wisely_9fd50d_4286111.jpg (34KB, 460x263px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 460x263px

>>52882299
also if people would actually filter their ads and not use crap like this, I wouldn't need to block it...

File: Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 12.55.44 PM.png (57KB, 568x241px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 568x241px

Wired can die in a fire for all I care

>>52882299
Me and my Pi-Hole laugh at you

>>52882299
>>On an average day, more than 20 percent of the traffic to WIRED.com comes from a reader
Must suck having a site with 4 users.

>>52883354
Great analogy.

>Over the past several years, there’s been a significant increase in the number of ads

I've never heard of the wired so I can't say that I care.

I get the feeling that this will have a much worse effect for them. Instead of people disabling adblock they will just stop going there.

>>52882368
>just block their adblock block
Does that work for everything though? I doubt it

>>52887681
Does easily on popular sites seeing as people will do it for you and put it in the ad blocker

I know that I'll probably get downvoted for this but here it is:

I operate a large typewriter website and I've decided to block desktop users. PC desktops cause the by far greatest loss in revenue in our business. From the time my great-great grandfather founded our company to today our revenue has gone down almost 99%.

To be clear: I've nothing against the digital age, I'm fine with mobile users. Some of the greatest people I know are mobile users. The problem is desktop users who are destroying our business with their entitlement.

File: katz8.jpg (39KB, 459x418px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 459x418px

>>52887742

Hilarious

>>52887773
Butthurt desktop user detected. U mad?

>watching TV
>ad break comes up
>go to change channel
>"Function not supported at this time"

>>52883139

I used to read dead tree wired in the 90s religiously - this anon is correct.

Relevant Wired never survived the dot com crash in '01

File: umatrix.webm (2MB, 587x652px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 587x652px

>>52883640
I disabled my adblocker and uMatrix and checked the result. Connected to no less than 43 domains.

Everyone with a red triangle (on the left) would usually get blocked by uMatrix due to anti tracking & ad filters.

>>52888155
Wat. Do you mean they "do" want people who don't make them money to stop going there?

File: image.jpg (43KB, 453x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 453x500px

>>52882299
>something in retard

oh no not wired

>>52882299
>without doing something in retard.
ahahaha, freudian slip much? Thinking about yourself too much, faggot OP

Jokes aside though, wired has all the rights to put their content behind a paywall and nobody should complain when they do.

Just like I have all the rights not to use that shit site.

In fact, go ahead wired, put yourself behind a paywall. Make yourself invisible so you can't annoy anyone, and lock up your stupid kin with you so they're gone too.

I welcome paywalls if that's what it takes to get rid of cancerous marketing ad bullshit.

>>52888332
*not to use that shit site and not to let their shit ads and other shit onto my pc or phone

>>52887742
I would just use a different user agent if your website was worth the effort of trying to access

>going to wired

>>52883247
You forgot the part where the owner has to pay his employees and for his food supply, while you demand he give it to you for free.

>>52888437
Why buy food when you can just pirate it?

>>52882299
>If,if you guise d-don't stop,we're gonna keep tightening this noose around our own necks.
Excellent! Everything is going as planned.

I just steal the mazagine off the stands.Makes great shit house reading material.

>>52883028
That's what happens when companies save money by hiring code monkeys from two week long "Be a coder!" boot camps filled with diversity selections.

>>52883426
Normalfags

>>52882299
>WAAAAH WAAAAH

File: x-0004.jpg (96KB, 780x459px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 780x459px

who the hell cares? any news sites that i follow, i load up in RSSOwl, and i view the articles through its crippled internal browser with javascript off. regardless, between slashdot, boingboing, lxer, linux insider, arstechnica, webupd8, and our lovely home here on 4chan, i couldn't see it effecting me to lose access to wired. i'll continue using my enormous hosts file, and i'll continue using ublock in my full-fledged web browsers.

>>52884024
>IMO 4chan has about the perfect amount of things going on
I kind of agree with you. It's shit on mobile.

>>52882299
it would be great if 4chan /g/ blocked wired and all clickbait sites/people from browsing, making threads.
unless 4chan gets a cut of the clickbait money.

>>52882299
I'd probably care if it were 2006

>>52882322
>I'm not posting on 4chan, I'm typing to my keyboard.

>>52891608
>I'm typing to my keyboard.
Could have got him good if you were better at English.

So this is how wired dies. Good riddance.

>>52882851
Good point, unless advertisers are gonna foot the third of my internet bill as well, fuck em

>>52889778
>i couldn't see it effecting me to lose access to wired
They'll start loading the article text through javascript (some sites already do this). You won't be missing anything though so who cares.

>>52891709
>get him good

kek, you're one to talk.

>>52882299
who?

Honestly I wish more sites would take this exact stance. No obnoxious ads, premium for no ads at all. Period.

>>52891747
he said "got"

>>52882322
bingo

>>52882618
>>52882649
whatevs

>they think their garbage is worth reading in the first place

Are they sjw infiltrated like digg?

>>52882299
If a site block you for blocking ads, just don't go to that site that's all.

>>52882299

Wait? Wired is still around?

>>52882299

lel wat is noscript

>>52883173
I think eventually most of the internet will be behind paywalls. Perhaps in a decade or two, who knows.That's the only way I can think to defeat adblockers.

>>52882299
>thinking there wont be a work around
>going to that shitty site
>reading those shitty articles
>thinking this is good
>stealing content
>killing the internet
Whoa there anon, you don't wanna look too retarded now.

>>52882299
>>52882299
>so they should
Fuck off shill. If I can't use a website without an adblocker then it's as good as dead to me.

>>52892788
get a .edu or GTFO, there are sites that anonymously visit university's subscription paywalls for you

>>52892788
>defeat adblockers
Yeah sure, because adblockers are the problem. That aside I don't think an internet behind paywalls will exist, ever.
There is absolutly no website that can justify blocking adblockers or putting a paywall to generate income. We, the people, don't owe anything to a website it's actually the other way around. And by that i'm mostly thinking about the fact that there is no place in the internet that i need to be forever.
Hell if tomorrow hiro makes it that i need to buy a 4chan Pass to browse the site, i'll just stop coming here. It's actually very simple, there's no unique place on the internet so nothing can stop me from enjoying my stay where i go.

Also the idea of collecting all the knowledge of humanity from any ages is stronger than clic baiting ads revenue.

>>52892794
>implying that stealing content from the original source isn't how 90 percent of internet journalism works

File: 1444679243282.jpg (24KB, 375x305px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 375x305px

>mfw I've never been to Wired.com
>and if I did, I'd just disable my adblocker for that one site, then re-enable it once I left... until Ublock loopholes it.

People think their decisions really effect others, don't they? There's always a loophole.

Most tech news sites consist of 95% news updates you can get anywhere else at the same time, plus 2.5% "MY OPINION IS IMPORTANT" bullshit editorials, and another 2.5% of actually interesting longform reporting.

Then there are shameless content farms like Wired and The Verge that mix in a metric ton of pretentious, insufferable mainstream pop culture TRASH for the sake of maximizing ad revenue by appealing to every imaginable demographic.

I never waste a moment to let Nilay Patel know that I block every last ad on all Vox websites.

File: 1421969678040.jpg (79KB, 531x561px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 531x561px

Not if I block them first

>>52887871

Don't give them ideas.

File: capt chen.png (40KB, 184x184px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 184x184px

>>52882299
And nothing of value was lost.

>>52882299
They'll find that they reach a much smaller audience.

>wired

No fucks given.jpg

>>52882299
>>You can subscribe to a brand-new Ad-Free version of WIRED.com. For $1 a week, you will get complete access to our content, with no display advertising or ad tracking.

this is pretty reasonable tho. i'd pay to see more websites with wired quality articles desu senpai

>>52894382
>implying wired produces anything of value

>>52894407
isn't wired the guy who caught that traitor chelsea manning or whatever?

Their content isn't free because they're nice. It's free because no one would pay for it. Once they can't make money by making it be free, they won't just charge for the content, they'll die. And no one will care.

>>52883354
B-but sometimes the shit is relevant and of interest to me

>>52894382.com
dollar a week is probably pushing it, that's more than a Time digital+magazine subscription

>wired
And no one on the planet cared even the slightest little bit.

>>52882299
omg.. no.. how will i read really long boring articles that ive already read about on ars months beforehand.. nooooo.. anyone but wired..

>>52892788
Nope. Historically, paywalls cause users to fuck off somewhere else, usually to someone offering the same service for free.

And all these fucks bitching about people not requesting that their page loads the 100+megs of five minute flash video ads can fuck right off as well. There's plenty of other sites that will be chomping at the bit to replace them.

And besides, the real money isn't in ad revenue, it's in farming and selling user data.

I honestly don't mind sites blocking adblock.
why? because it's just a normalfag filter.
people who can't do anything more than install regular old adblock because they heard of it from their friend should see ads, because they actually might work on them. someone who goes to the effort of using ublock or umatrix, or setting up their own HOSTS, or using router blocking. they're never going to buy that shit anyways.

>>52882299
I'm totally fine paying for content I like. I don't like ads so I'm not going to download them. Implying there won't be a fix for this in a week anyways.

>>52882299
Not like it matters, I don't think I've ever been on wired.

When you server static ads from your own domain we can talk again about adblocking.

As long as it's bullshit piped in from some ad network that tries to track every thing your visitors do you can go fuck yourself with a rusty rake. I hope your website dies.

File: 1223847957007.jpg (40KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 256x256px

>>52882299

>Stealing content
>Stealing whats already freely published

I wouldn't bother with blocking ads if they reverted back to the harmless .gif banners from 1996. Ads are terrible now. They're intrusive, take up literally most of the page, they track you, they use annoying as fuck scripts, pop unders, etc.

If I have to choose between these types of ads and not seeing the content, I'll choose not seeing the content at all. Those types of ads have been driving the internet toward a cable TV + freemium model for the past decade. It's fucking stupid.

Every source of media has tried to lessen the need to "pirate."

Games are now available through digital distribution to ease the pain of buying a game

Music has done the same as games, thanks to Soujaboytellem

Movies as well.

But "muh jurnalism" is still something people really care about.

>>52895199
>ads don't works on me cliché
It's a bit off topic but maybe you should read on the subject. Do you know how many ads you see everyday ? And how they really works on you ?
It's really interesting to say the least.

>>52895474

>Wake up
>Commute to work
>See tractor with a trailer for mcdonalds
>6 hours later, lunch time
>Gets mcdonalds

FUCKING MCDONALDS

File: 18-moby1.jpg (104KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 450x600px

>>52885539
Jeffk been a while.

>>52883229
I don't need more features I just need all ads blocked.

>>52882477
Wait.

Pop ups still exist?

>>52882299
Suck my dick

>>52894443
>manning
>traitor

pick one

>>52882299
>going on journalism websites

enjoy killing your braincells with useless trivia.

>>52887681

Try Anti-Adblock Killer or alternative scripts

they say mozilla ceo with his new brave browser that is still quite new, will natively block ads and if ads are open, will pay a small amount for any ad that a user loads/views

might be worth some attention.. still, abp

>>52884073
This.

https://github.com/reek/anti-adblock-killer

>>52885059

Well ad revenue became the primary source of income for content on Internet. So tey throw as much of it as they can to stay afloat or even profit

>>52895567
then use ublock. the UI takes some getting used to but it is better than adblock + noscript. personally I use ublock for ads and umatrix like I used noscript, since you can get really specific with cross-site requests, and it does other things like useragent/referrer spoofing. it is overkill though. ublock + umatrix + noscript + addons to make your browser less unique for maximum paranoia. but when you use multiple addons/extensions you have to know how their features overlap so you are only use that addon for what you need. you can get by fine on just ublock if all you want is simple adblocking and blocking domains that aren't the site itself.

>>52883805
>install linux and firefox with adblocking just so my dad can browse porn without fucking up the PC and bothering me to fix it.

>>52883777
>>52883162
works for twitch. I bet they make 90% of their money from the cut from subs and turbo users. the rest the make from being big enough to do events and brand deals that are essentially ads but at least it's not a malicious banner, its an actual production that you opt to watch and it might even be entertaining.

>>52892788
if that happens you'll just see more use of free, community sites like torrent trackers, forums, etc. even ones that just regurgitate actual "publications". I mean that's a huge part of the internet already, that's basically what reddit is and aggregation sites in general.

>>52895474
>Do you know how many ads you see everyday ?
uhhh... very few? I block all ads online which is where I spend most of my time. I only watch public TV and listen to public radio, and not often. they have ads but they're clear and minimal and usually for the same few foundations. I don't get out much either so I don't see many billboards. obviously there are many ways to deliver ads and I see some in the content I consume online but in those cases it's usually very specific because I'm actively looking for tech or games or something, or I'm shopping. I guess I see ads when I go to the movies or something. you can't completely avoid ads but you can reduce how much you see by 90% compared to the average person.

>>52882299
Who reads wired?
I actively resist reading them

We need to standardize use of some kind of archiver site so one person views the site and it archives it for everyone else, an auto redirecting browser plugin would be great.

>>52882363
this

Do you wanna know why I don't read such bullshit sites?

Because they are fucking PACKED with fucking js from gazillions of different domains.
Fuck them, there are news sites out there that aren't such pieces of shit and respect their tech savvy users.
Having such bullshit on a website that shows cupcake recipes? Sure, idgaf about those idiots.
Having such bullshit on a website that's meant to be made for tech savvy people? Fukk off

>>52882322

This a thousand times.

Second of all, they can fuck off. There is reeks anti-adblock for a reason. We are always going to be a step ahead of them until the point they just put up a paywall and (hopefully) die out and waste precious internet space.