Where does this fucking entitlement come from? If I don't

> where does this fucking entitlement come from
From owning and operating a server that's a continuous drain of money.

Maybe when you grow older, you'd understand that not anything in life is free

>>57240743
I think he was implying that they literally did it
>for free
and didn't care about the cost of hosting enough to push advertisements onto people enough that they would weed out u/adblock users to the point of complete alienation

>>57240764
Am I saying it's a smart move? No. But nothing is free. Everything operates at a cost.

The blocker in OP's pic even asks for flat out money so they can get by.

>>57240694
No worries, it's only the third volley in this war.
Next up is ad-blocker-blocker avoidance and ad downloading proxies to defeat the trackers.

>>57240694
>ad-light
so pay them and still get ads
nigga what is this site

File: aaaaa.png (100KB, 400x296px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 400x296px

I can sort of understand anti-ad-block sentiment but then I saw
>$1
>ad-light
burn it to the ground

>>57240801
It's not so they can get by.
They simply found a way to observe the number of users who were blocking the ads and were shocked by it.
The thing is though, those users were never were a source of revenue for the site. Impressions don't pay shit and click-through rates have always been 1% or less.

Most people on the internet have been consuming content for free most of the time since the dawn of internet ads.

I use adblock not because of ads, but because of viruses and shit. If they're going to force people to remove their security features they should be able to take responsibility for any damages it causes.

Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?

File: 1474870596316.png (733KB, 653x763px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 653x763px

>>57240910
>I use adblock not because of ads, but because of viruses and shit. If they're going to force people to remove their security features they should be able to take responsibility for any damages it causes.

This. Antivirus programs protect you from shit that came out ten days ago. Adblock protects you from shit that came out ten minutes ago.

>Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?

Because fuck advertisers. They had their shot and have ruined their chances.

>>57240910
>Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?

>have an entire web page to display your ad
>have a fucking video that plays before the content the user wants to see is displayed
no friend. the people who plan ads are retards that think having the ad be more annoying will make people remember it.
if it was not for ad blockers ads would become more and more annoying.
thanks to ad blockers website owners are starting to reconsider putting a shit load of ads onto their platforms as it will make the users look for ways to remove them.

>>57241195
>he doesn't get all his news on the chan

>>57240743
How much does it cost to run a website these days? Like a dollar a month, or even less? Are you poor?

>>57241238
>open tumblr account
>buy 0.99c domain from Godaddy
>forward domain to tumblr account
>?????
>advertisements!

>>57240694
There is a lot of back and forth discussion on this topic lately.
Just to lay down some interesting details on this arena I went and looked this up.

We've had ad blockers for a while and something like 40%+ of the internet population use them now.

If they were truly causing damage to our favorite sites as so many claim
http://arstechnica.com/business/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/08/10/online-ad-blocking-is-on-the-rise-thats-bad-news-for-everyone/
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/professionals/092215/how-adblocker-hurts-your-favorite-websites.asp
http://www.kevinmuldoon.com/blocking-internet-ads-ethical/

we should be able to see at least these measurable effects:
- a pretty big list of sites that have closed out due to ad blocking
- a bunch of others with measurable losses in revenue
- a marked decrease in total internet ad spending (since the payments don't go out unless the ad is shown or clicked)

>>57241334
So let's see:
How many sites have shut down due to ad blocking?
- No one talking about it

How many sites report lost revenue due to ad blocking?
- References to a Page Fair report: https://downloads.pagefair.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2015_report-the_cost_of_ad_blocking.pdf
- More on this in a sec

How much has internet ad spending changes in the last 5 years?
- The $600 billion advertising industry, which is growing at 5% rate annually
- Budget allocation for online ads is increasing at the expense of TV and print media
- http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2015/09/28/trends-in-global-advertising-industry-winners-and-losers-part-1/#78d1cb6823a1
- Total US Ad Spending to See Largest Increase Since 2004
- Advertisers will invest more than $50 billion in digital channels in 2014 for the first time, an increase of 17.7% over 2013
- http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Total-US-Ad-Spending-See-Largest-Increase-Since-2004/1010982
- Global ad spend is on track to grow 5.5% this year to $537 billion, while Internet advertising will account for nearly one-quarter of that, at $121 billion
- This year, however, search still rules the roost
- Meanwhile, mobile continues to be a small but fast-growing proportion of business
- ZenithOptimedia says that Internet advertising will remain the fastest-growing category for ad spend, although its pace is slowing down somewhat. In 2013, it grew by 16.2% but that will decline to 16% between 2014 and 2016.
- https://techcrunch.com/2014/04/07/internet-ad-spend-to-reach-121b-in-2014-23-of-537b-total-ad-spend-ad-tech-gives-display-a-boost-over-search/


So it seems that if any sites really have shut down just due to ad blocking, no one seems to care about them and internet ads remain a huge chunk of a $600 billion industry that is gowning at a respectable rate.

>>57240694
If I see that kind of message I simply won't use the site

>DO IT NOW

Why so fucking pushy?

>ad-light

fucking DROPPED

>>57241376
And how about the claims of lost revenues? Is there at least some substance there?
This is the best report I could find. Several sites are linking to it and claiming this is proof of the damage.
https://downloads.pagefair.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2015_report-the_cost_of_ad_blocking.pdf

> The fndings
> Ad block usage in the United States resulted in an estimated $5.8B in
> blocked revenue during 2014. It is expected to cost $10.7B in 2015 and
> $20.3B in 2016.
> The global cost of ad blocking is expected to be $41.4B by 2016.

> The botom line
> Although the 198 million MAUs in Q2 2015 represents only 6% of the
> global internet population, ad blocking is estimated to cost over $21B in
> 2015, which is 14% of the global ad spend.
^(not according to the $600B figure others are quoting)
> Methodology
> Potential digital advertising revenue was calculated by dividing the reported
> revenue for 2014 (source: eMarketer) by (1- the ad blocking rate in a particular
> country). Blocked advertising revenue was estimated as the diference between
> potential and reported revenue

So they are assuming that everyone who visits a site generates ad revenue if they are not using an ad blocker.
How do sites get paid by ads?
CPM - cost per 1k impressions
CPA - cost per action
CPC - cost per click

https://monetizepros.com/display-advertising/average-cpm-rates/
https://monetizepros.com/monetization-basics/how-much-money-should-my-website-make-seven-real-world-website-revenue-statements/
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/the-economics-of-blogging-and-the-huffington-post/
and for comparison https://secure2.sfdcstatic.com/assets/pdf/datasheets/sc-socialcom-advertising-benchmark.pdf

Of those payment methods, CPM tends to pay the least for text mediums but still make up most of the site's revenue.
So that explains why TC and Huff are in this fight but their CPM numbers are driven by monthly UNIQUE visitors.

>>57241238
like 5 dollars

>>57241660
>wall of text

But yea, TLDR, your ad blocker might cost TechCrunch and the like about 22 cents per visit if you are visiting for the first time.

>>57240743
So the internet cost nothing to run from its inception until Adblock became popular in ~2010?

>>57241334
Unrequested online ads get blocked because they:

- are in the form of popups
- have sound
- use flashy animation
- use distracting colours
- contain questionable content
- contain malware
- take up bandwidth
- take up too much space on a page

Fix your advertising style, or get blocked. Very simple.

>>57240694
"The customer is always right" is so passe, grandpa. Get with the times. Now it's "whatever makes money is always right".

>>57241739
Time is money and my time won't be wasted on clicking though ads and uninstalling malware. Check yourself, faggot child.

>>57241774
It's your prerogative to not use the internet grandpa. Nobody will miss you.

File: fuck off reddit.jpg (102KB, 640x623px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 640x623px

>>57241781
Go back to your apps and shiny fruit logos you tech illiterate numale sack of horse excrement.

>>57241811
Wow there gramps, don't get all excited, you might pop up a nerve again! Harhar! Get it?

>externally applied ads
b l o c k e d
l
o
c
k
e
d

>>57240694
Exactly OP. I haven't read an article on Wired in almost two years because of that bullshit. Their loss - if I had liked what I read I could have purchased a subscription.

File: vomit.gif (268KB, 288x216px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 288x216px

>>57241831
Kill yourself you fat bag of cocks. If I was your father I would've had you on the end of a clothes hanger the first chance I got. I want you have a seat and think about who would actually go to your funeral if you died today. You kids are literally worthless. Your life has zero value to me or anyone else besides yourself. I hope you die a slow and painful death and realize what a nobody you are as you drift out of your pathetic shell of a body. I would not shit on you if I was paid to do so. You are not worthy of something I have created.

yep just block everything

>>57240743
>Maybe when you grow older, you'd understand that not anything in life is free
factual statement

someone that runs a website should expect to be able to do so without personal financial costs

>>57241697
>>57241719
>muh tripfagging

>>57241894
Not that anon, but I think his original post was not serious

>anti adblock notice pops up
>adblock the notice

:^)

>>57240694
Daily reminder that websites of actual value don't need ads to survive. For example, Wikipedia and Consumer Reports.

>>57241998
wikipedo shills for donations though

and google is literally an ad company

>>57241998

>muh jimmy wales

>>57240743
I'm going to keep running ublock AND adblockblockblock until ads stop being security threats.

if sites didnt have shitty ads that popup and block me from reading shit i wouldnt block them

>>57240743
Why do people defend sites that owe them nothing? Unless you are reimbursed for your defense of said sites? Ads can be security vulnerabilities, and unless your site is willing to pay for damages to my machine from getting infected from your site I will not unblock them.

>>57240910
>Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML

but advertisers want to shove js into their ads and track/datamine you before the page is even done loading, so fuck them.

File: new.png (149KB, 620x427px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 620x427px

>>57242011
>>57242012
Would you rather have ads about your browsing history and malware?

File: 649.jpg (35KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x640px

>>57240694
>Pay to go to website
>Still see ads

>>57241953
fuck off only falcon and reverse (whos dead) are allowed to use trips

>>57242253
Allowed because why? They forced it upon the board for so long? They should go to reddit if they want fame so much.

>>57242054
The js bit is actually more due to the instant ad auctions happening on more sites.

If the site uses a js component from an ad network like AdSense then the site actually just offers a place for an ad, AdSense then:
auctions it to the highest bidder on the relevant keywords,
picks the winner,
takes payment,
delivers the ad,
skims their fee,
and drops the rest to the site owner
all in about one second or less.

The rest of the bullshit js from the actual adverts is just a byproduct of being js land in the first place

>>57242264
this

>>57242253
literally >>/out/

>>57240694
greasemonkey + Anti-Adblock Killer, silly goose.

>>57241660
>And how about the claims of lost revenues?
it's pure bullshit. The ads were always blocked, it's just that they find out how much they were blocked and thought "oh shit i'm losing all this money because of those adblockers" but in reality they never ever had that money to begin with.

If they effectively block ad blockers they will not have more money, they'll just don't have adblockers browsing their site.

>>57242410
Maybe they'll feel good about percentage though, like "wow i increase my % of ads-revenue/viewer, amazing".

>>57240743
how does having ads like "5 simple secrets found out by a mom to reverse aging" or "you can earn $627 a day working from home" help anyone

>>57241376
>if any sites really have shut down just due to ad blocking, no one seems to care about them

If you had a company, and your only source of revenue was through online ads, I'd tell you that your model sucks. That's not a company, that's a clickbait generator and the world is better off with it gone.

>>57242191
Don't worry, if you pay, then they won't have to show you ads any more! Look at how well that worked out with cable TV!

I can only imagine that in the near future, self-driving cars will stop driving if you don't look at the billboards on the side of the road

>>57242191
Why I never used hulu for more then the trial period

>>57240694
Basically, they don't make anything worth paying for, but they want LOTS of money regardless.

It's been part of western culture since copyright became a thing

>yes, i know i haven't made anything new, but keep giving me money anyways.

File: 1423307804369.gif (126KB, 306x220px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 306x220px

>>57240743
>mfw i dont go back to any site that pulls that shit.

>>57240694
It's like all the revenue lost by pay-tv not incessantly playing ads like the free-to-view channels

>>57241998
>Actual value
>wikipedia

Sorry, I didn't know a shithole where rhetorical skills and dedication trumped academic qualifications was of actual value

If /pol/ and tumblr can drown out real academics and still present their ephermal bullshit as fact, it's a cancer upon society, not a valuable resource.

>consumer reports
It's like wikipedia but even less verified

Of note is how cars are ranked. A deadly unreliable honda civic will get a high rating because the problems are never reported to a dealer network or mechanic that cooperates with CR, but a high end car with a bulletproof engine will tank from shit like a moron blaming the car because he tried to adjust electronic mirrors by pushing on them really hard

File: ordinary guy.jpg (60KB, 395x684px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 395x684px

You guys know the SECOND adblock and similar were to disapear we would go back to the "old" internet with flashing malicious sound playing ads absolutely everywhere.

Brave has the best idea I've seen for making people want ads and giving them greater value.

>>57240694
Then you merely stop using their service you tard.

>>57240743
Dude, they're serving up TEXT. That message is probably twice as big as the article they've blocked.

Just serve up people who use ad-blocker a pure-text version of the site and everyone's happy.

>>57240694
>ad-light access
wait, so they expect us to pay for *fewer* ads (as opposed to paying for *no* ads)?

>>57242624
Nice bait. I almost fell for it.

>>57241254
I've never thought of that, thanks for the idea anon

File: image.png (602KB, 481x586px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 481x586px

>>57241953
I have nothing to say, so let's just point out that he uses trips. Are you not sucking his dick by giving this kind of attention to trip user?

>>57242253
>t.Th !e.FaLconO6
fuck off everybody knows what you're doing you retard.

>>57243097
>>57242253
in his defense, that post was a new IP to the thread

>>57243111
>his defense
you mean your defense

>>57243117
you mean check 'em

File: bb391156-bf19-4112-a27c-54c8c183826a.jpg (111KB, 842x854px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 842x854px

>>57240694
>you try and force me then I will just not use your bandwidth for free!

>people actually defend ads now

The internet has changed so much...

>>57243215
Do not confuse normal people with shills. Normal people did not change, and they hate ads. The proof is easy to find: ~50% (or higher) of people use some form of adblock.

Shills come in here and pretend that >1% of people want ads. I hope that ad companies that pay these shills ALL go bankrupt, and leave them stranded. Yeah, I would like fries with that.

>>57243215
I don't think anyone's defending them, we're just explaining to OP that threatening to leave is an asinine response to someone that has nothing to gain from you staying.

>>57243269
>nothing to gain from you staying
False! Web traffic is a MAJOR factor in determining site health. OP leaving and viewing content elsewhere will lower ForcedAdSite's value, and raise NoAdSite's value. When ForcedAdSite's web traffic drops, they become a less lucrative investment.

If enough people follow OP's example, ForcedAdSite will shut down.

>>57240694
DAILY REMINDER ads make revenue for corporations who support American government and, therefore, bringing democracy for the oppressed nations under rule of evil dictators. It's up to you will you be the enemy of America or not.

Memes aside, can anyone tell me why vanilla adblock (not ABP) is so "bad"?

You can turn the acceptable ads off, set custom filters and block social media and all that crap.

I tried ublock origin and when I went to a site I normally go to and it didn't block any of the ads.

>>57243344
Chinese companies make ads using slave labour. Are you a dirty commie, an enemy of freedom and democracy? Do you support slave labour?

Say NO to slavery! Say NO to ads!

>>57243401
I browse sites only with American ad companies :^)

>>57241238
I hope you're joking. Otherwise you're on stupid kid.

File: FREEDOMburgerDEMOCRACYsodaLIBERTYfriesWALKonMOON.png (275KB, 600x397px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 600x397px

>>57243422
A true patriot. God bless!

Didnt read anything, but LOL 1$, IS THIS FOR A MONTH? IN GERMAN THOSE BASTARDS WANT UP TO 30€/MONTH FOR AD FREE LEL

>>57241998
>wikipedia
>website of actual value
Good one

>>57241953
>muh 4chan gold posting
kys

>>57242332
Why not do it from the backend?
There's 0 reason to use JS for it.

>>57241998
>>57241998
Wikipedia is largely wasteful.

>current featured article on Bud Dunn
>in pure text through gopherpedia = 8kb
>In HTML with images and stuff = 450kb

>>57242410
Not to mention that the script used to detect and block is probably bigger than what they're blocking.

File: 02-mammals.jpg (494KB, 1024x525px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1024x525px

>>57241719
Actually agree with the tripfag to an extent.
Popups are a no wither over what you're viewing or in a separate window ever.
Have sound is no.
Fatty video is a no in general.

Last and most important, Malware; Remember what happened with Forbes?
Ads are fine, It's just they always want to be lazy and do the least amount of effort for the most profit (which is normal) however when it doesn't work rather than adapt or clean up their act, they throw these bitch fits which puts people off even more so, which intern kills the business model.

Were "almost" past the point of no return, allot of people are just like "Fuck adds!" without understanding entirely why it was a popular stance.

>>57240743
fpbp
/thread

>>57244060
Enjoy your malware.
mind doing some bitcoin mining for me?
I mean, at least I'm asking you rather than just sneaking it onto your computer.

so... which adblocker do people use/recommend?

>>57244101
uGentoo

File: 1477322353236.gif (67KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 600x400px

Daily reminder that Doubleclick and AdSense ToS prohibit restricting access to a website or features thereof if an ad blocker is detected.
If you come across a website using these ad networks while restricting ad blockers in any way, report them to Google to get their account terminated.

>>57244101
No script and add block of some sort for Firefox, using ABP still.
Chrome, I have ghostery ABP and uMatrix.. probably a bit overkill but chrome doesn't have no scrypt.
Allot of people hate ABP because of his allowed adds in default, so see what they have to say about alternatives when they complain.

>>57241953
>being a faggot

I'd rather keep the tripfag than an actual fag.

>>57240743
i'm saving them bandwidth by not downloading certain elements of their page

>We here at website.com provide a free* service for everyone**!
>*free means ad supported
>**everyone means only people who don't block ads

>ad light access
Christ.
Well they're basically saying their actual content is actually advertisements? Seems like it.

What does /g/ think of 4chan dying because of ad blocking?

>>57244247
Looks like it didn't go with it's time.

>>57240694
look, you entitled yuro shitstain

if you don't watch ads, you don't make me money. if you don't make me money, you're just a fucking waste of my bandwidth. fuck off

WHO actually EVER clicks on adverts, let alone buy anything through an advert link?

>>57244358
Retards.

>>57244358
no idea, there must be someone, otherwise ads wouldn't still exist

>>57244374
>>57244371
googlebot

File: 13445568.png (10KB, 418x230px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 418x230px

>>57240694
>tfw never saw one of those messages

>>57240743
You run the site out of your own pocket, at a loss, because you have a passion for the content and a desire to share it with us.

The fact that you want us to read your content is why YOU pay, not us. Shift the cost to us and you already lost my visit. I don't go to any site that tries to shift cost.

If you want to make money, get a real job. Sites are purely hobbyist and it should stay that way

>>57241238
For most of the websites that people complaining about adblocking are hosting, yes.

>>57244441
I agree, having adverts isn't a decent business/revenue model
there has to be another way

>>57241334
>>57241376
>>57241660
You know, this makes me wonder if anyone has tried to work out the cost of malware delivered by online advertising.

scorched earth. ads are the primary malware delivery vehicle
also go pick up a magazine and look at the tasteful, elegant ads and compare that to what you see on the web

>>57244441
>this is what freetards actually believe

>>57240694
>implying they care if you use their site if you're not helping them any

File: 1475990686431.png (389KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 1024x576px

>>57244358
I actually have made purchases from J-List, which I found out about from 4chan advertisements

>>57244358
Anyone who doesn't use an adblock. Trust me, the majority of people still doesn't use it. I even see people on /g/ sometimes who don't use it.

It's not as bad as those modal dialog boxes that pop up after a few seconds "HEY IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ENJOYING READING THIS ARTICLE PLEASE ENTER YOUR EMAIL TO GET UPDATES!!!!1"

>>57244570
Like I said, retards

>>57241254
Doesn't Scott Adams do this?

http://blog.dilbert.com

>>57242011
>wikipedo shills for donations though
They do to get MORE MONEY (tm), but they don't need them to survive.

>2017 minus 2 months
>not using your openWRT or gargoyle router to block ads
It's like you guys don't even fap

>>57244985
Adblock blockers don't use any special detection methods to detect the extension itself.
You could trip it with the hosts file as well.

Host file blocking is a pretty good method, particularly for whole networks, but you're going to end up getting shafted by these anti-adblock scripts that trip when they try to test connections to ad domains that you have blocked, and you're unable to block the scripts due to not having a content blocker installed.

>>57244985
I don't, haven't done for almost two years

>>57244441
What about the journalists who write for the website? Do they need to travel the world to attend and report conferences for free?

They're providing a service and you're refusing to not even have a few kb/mb taken by shitty ads you don't care about.

Kys you fucking self-entitled degenerate.

>>57245346
They have no money problems because they sell out to various companies to write sponsored articles.

>>57240743
There's a ton of open source software, the same logic that makes people do that should be able to make people have free websites.

Is it or me or have advertisements only grown more invasive as time has gone on? I used to think that there were some pretty obnoxious ones back in the day, but if I visit a news site there's a solid chance that it'll start playing an audio-enabled ad or video, or they'll be doing this weird fucking thing where the entire background is a video ad, or they keep pulling the scroll bar up to look at an ad that loaded in long since you've scrolled down to look at page content

The one thing that really brings my piss to a boil is on-load modals
They are objectively a terrible technique for advertisement and people still insist on using them. They're a glorified pop-up, how are they still a fucking thing

This is what you get for telling normies about adblock lads

www.reeksite.com

go. follow instructions. return to leeching off of BusinessInsider. if these tech illiterate websites (old cunts running them) have found a way to block the blockers, you need to become slightly less tech illiterate yourself OP.

>>57245879
http://reeksite.com/anti-adblock-killer/#filterlist

oops. this is the exact link. reeksite.com is some search engine or something.

>>57245346
>journalists

circlejerk.

>From owning and operating a server that's a continuous drain of money.
companies have been actively destroying any peer-based distribution technology for decades

they chose to have this centralized internet where all your songs are streamed from a single site rather than sharing with your neighbor. when you assram DRM into your beloved customers they can only get it from your server with all your added bullshit. pirates are always going to break your drm. if you released drm pdf of stories with non-malware ads (like print) more people will see those ads when sharing copies and honest people will still pay for subscriptions. as usual all these companies want to do is whine victim and it will take decades for things to improve.

>>57242332
>>57243886
wait, it does all that shit on the client side?
gives me an idea

could you say, use JS to mine bitcions client side while a webpage is loading? just for a second or 2, not a botnet, On a site that gets a lot of traffic like 4chan, it might work.

>>57241398
This

>>57240743
This (you) is free, anon.

File: 1469028715875.jpg (93KB, 755x696px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 755x696px

>you have the option to pay but still get ads
you can kiss my smelly bumhole, I run adblocker even on 4chan

>adblocker on the net
>TV decoder with the option of recording, so If I want to see a movie/show I record it, wait for it to finish, watch it and fast forward the commercials
>radios tuned to student's radio of my university because no commercials either

>>57244555
>go pick up a magazine and look at the tasteful, elegant ads and compare that to what you see on the web

I'm waiting for the day i see some really bad photoshop with the title saying "how to get a 10 inch dick with this simple trick" in a serious newspaper

>>57246549
>2016
>radio
>TV

You still see ads on the street

>>57249069
>2016
>streets

>>57249145
>2016
>current year

>>57240694
My Wired reading habits changed from "very rare" to "non-existent" when they did this bullshit

>>57240694
I refuse paying for anything that isnt physical
Sue me

>>57245346
>journalists
You mean bloggers senpai?

File: Screen Shot 2016-10-26 at 12.31.53 PM (1).png (286KB, 1323x1038px) Image search: [Google]

286KB, 1323x1038px

Half y'all probably /pol/ shitposters who get mad at people leeching off welfare, but don't even realize they are the leeches themselves with adblocks.

Fuck, I use it too. But I don't try to take the high ground in this case, I realize what I do is wrong.

Get ready to be subscribing for access to most of the internet in the near future, like I already do to support what I care about :)

>>57249581
>Reply
Literal shill-cuck. I hope you get herpes.

>>57249581
>Get ready to be subscribing for access to most of the internet in the near future
We already have that. It's called ISP costs.

>>57242872
They still have to pay the writers.

>>57242872
Although I will say I'd greatly enjoy if news services started serving articles out over telnet or something.

HTTP was a huge mistake. Make HyperCard networkable!

Fucking normies.
Back in my day internet was free without ads.

>>57243937
autism

>>57240764
cuck

>Please turn off your adblock or subscribe for $1-$5
>Use Greasemonkey and Edit Cookies to block the notification
>Enjoy no ads and no annoying begging

I thought you guys were good with technology.

>>57240815
>>57240837
>>57241412
>>57242191

the rabbit-hole of kikery is bottomless, we have to turn back before it's too late...

>>57241781
Look, we all know for a fact that you're a troll (except for that guy who keeps taking your bait), but you should consider getting your giggles by trolling on a different subject.

If people like you keep pretending to be retarded, somone is gonna snatch that up and actually be retarded, that's why we're in a lot of situations that we are nowdays.

So please consider trolling about things that don't matter, go to /v/ and shill graphics cards or game consoles, those kids get riled up really easy.

File: gopher.jpg (43KB, 840x630px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 840x630px

>>57249872

Can't most adblockers block and evade adblocker blockers now?

>>57251104
Yes.

uBlock Origin with all filterlists enabled, AND greasemonkey + reek's anti-adblock killer take care of almost all of them.

>>57240694
using ublock + umatrix i don't think i've ever been stopped by one of these

adblocking is a moral obligation to kill the ad-supported internet as quickly as possible

>>57245346
>bloggers
you're not entitled to compensation for a shitty job that anyone can do and no one recognizes the value of

>>57241334
The small players suffer the most from adblockers because every penny counts for them. And those sites are usually the ones you visit incidentally when you need specific information.

Not companies like Google who just earn a billion less. The big sites will just stay around abusing their power position.

Adblocking is going to change/is changing websites for the worse, and this comes from someone who uses uBlock.

I'd rather just have to pay by having some elements of the screen be occupied by ads than having to pay to use the website.

>>57251604
How do you suppose we should start financing websites instead?

>>57251956
The internet isn't going to become pay to visit. Instead the nicely tucked away ads in the corner of your screen will turn into 'sponsored content'. Independent news and reviews are going to get sponsored.

>>57251979
Well that just sounds even worse

In most cases they just put an adblocklock frame on top of the content of the page. Just edit it out from the HTML file.

>>57240812
this. enjoy the wild west while it lasts and if you want something to change, DESIGN that shit

>>57251993
You can already see it everywhere. On the biggest Dutch news site you can find articles about what feed your picky children, chewing gum and how to pay with your mobile phone (with the ING app). YouTubers get paid. On comparison sites you can buy a higher spot.

>>57252062
*what to feed your picky children

File: 1443444577909.jpg (132KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 960x640px

>>57241254
Huh.
Finally a use for tumblr.

File: Jiro.Dreams.of.Sushi.720p.Bluray.x264.AC3.MVGroup.Forum.mkv_snapshot_00.40.47_[2016.10.26_13.21.06].jpg (126KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1280x720px

>>57252135

>"and then you get depressed."

Good shit.

>>57240815
>>57240837
>>57241412
I think they refer to their articles, as most of these seem to be advertisement for something as well.

>>57242957
>not abusing github pages for free webhosting

itt: people who think websites care if they lose users who literally bring in no revenue
classic g autism

>>57251965
We don't. There was tons of great content before internet advertising became popular. Even early youtube was pretty good. I say if a site requires revenue to stay afloat, it is excess content that deserves to die.

>>57252453
word Wikipedia is excess content

>>57240694
>Where does this fucking entitlement come from? If I don't want to see your ads and you try and force me then I will just not use your site.

Yes, that's what they want too. They don't care about you if you block ads, they only want your visit if you give something in return.

It sounds like YOU are the entitled one. If you don't want to see ads, don't visit their site. Problem solved.

>>57241238
A web game I run costs about $15k/mo

>>57252794
You got it wrong buddy. You aren't running a service or anything, you are just merely stating your useless opinions on a poorly coded website that takes 15 seconds to load.
You should feel priviledged that I cared enough to check out your shitty article.

If it is a hobby then don't ask for money, if you still want money then you shouldn't force viewers to pay you.

If your website has anything remotely valuable then it will survive without ads. A good way to weed out useless websites ran by arts students with zero redeemable quality.

who the fuck use the internet and actually buys shit from ads they see rather than informed shopping? is the average web user perpetually drunk on alcohol with disposable paypal balance? is it weird to spend 15 minutes googling what it is you want to buy with your money?

>>57240743
People without business model have no bussiness hosting a website. They can literally fuck off

Same thing with websites that force you to create an account or ask you to log in with your facebook account.

No, and fuck facebook, too.

>i have a business
>it has a website
>i should have complete control over your computer to completely control my self interests
>this includes displaying my content and running random code, some of which I didn't write and is from third parties

fuck this

>>57254602
*serve my self interests

>>57241719
Let's be real, they're getting blocked anyway.

If the only way your website can sustain itself is through advertising, then I guess the service you were offering wasn't that important to begin with.

>>57254582
we might actually start calling them something other than "websites" because they're very far from being a part of the actual www. there was already things like AOL which weren't part of the web, and there is a point in which the web actual recognized aol as merging/joining the www. shit that requires federated logins are more like platform guardhouses.

>>57240743

my only cost is my internet subscription, their costs aren't my problem

>>57254673
Agreed, but I feel like that's a huge problem.
Either give your info and take off your adblock or all the internets I have absorbed are out of your reach.

>>57241739
>b-but m-muh free merket, m-muh capitalism is solution to all

File: 1459873286802.jpg (17KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x400px

>>57244222
read up on the term "native advertisments"

its articles that look like regular news articles but are actually advertisement for products.
most product reviews actually fall under this and those are the easiest to recognize.
these things are nefarious since they arent technically ads. theyre just articles that act like ads in that they are written like regular articles so the average joe wont know its actually an advertisement but subconsciously still gets advertised to.

>>57244101
ABP, Ghostery, uMatrix and NoScript.
Overkill, but whatever. There was a time when ABP + NoScript/Ghostery was enough. But nowadays there's just so much shit on every site, that something will always slip through.

you're worthless to them anyway

>>57254923
>Tfw they need consumers
>Tfw we don't need them
I think you got that backwards, but you're just baiting anyways

File: 1464545308034.jpg (34KB, 330x549px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 330x549px

>feels entitled to an ad-free access to the site's content

>>57255668
Just try and stop me faggot

You can't, because your greed is to strong to ban IPs of potential ad revenue targets.

>>57255668
>Feels entitled to access my computer just to dump some 6th grade level, sometimes poorly researched and cited, ""writing"" on me.
>Thinks giving customers an ultimatum is going to increase site traffic

>>57252893
Care to self-promone? How many daily users? Cloud or metal?

>>57244131
>Ghostery
Go kill yourself, faggot.

>>57240743
>>(To receive your (You), please disable your Adblocker and send Anon $1)

>>57255009
They don't need normal consumers, they need consumers that don't block their ads. So if you block ads then they don't need you.

>>57240694
>site successfully stopped a person from using their services for free and being a constant drain on the servers

lol you are an idiot. do you think they're hurt when you don't visit the site?

It's better for them for you to not visit the site than to visit it ad free.

>>57256241
I feel like that's cutting out a huge chuck of their potential market though. Isn't part of business about reaching the biggest market possible? Cutting out that many people because you're butthurt about them blocking security vulnerabilities is stupid.

>>57241208
This. I don't think I use any other site for news or (You)s.

>>57244441
>websites are purely hobbyist
yeah im super sure all sites are simply run as a hobby
lol this is just a desperate attempt and trying to put a mask over the entitlement.

daily reminder when they push you away from their website because youre too much of a sperg to view ads, they get the outcome they want.

do you let a homeless keep eating at mcdonalds for free because he's not going to pay for the food either way? or do you kick him out?

>people defending businesses for free
You get nothing in return except (you)s. Is that why you do it?
>57256339
>Food analogies
But the homeless guy goes to a soup kitchen to get food for free.

>>57251929
If their content was worth viewing it'd be worth paying for. Your content isn't worth shit when you fluff it with ads

File: 1445110736774.jpg (43KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 640x640px

>thinking that ad revenue is an acceptable source of income for any establishment when something like routers hostfiles and plug in adblockers exist
it's their fault for hanging on blindly to a source of income that is flawed. The business world is a nasty one and these companies shouldn't expect anything less.
Expecting someone to halt a legal operation that benefits them because "weh losin money and muh server chast" is pure stupidity and delusion.

I turned off adblock for a day to see what it's like.

After experiencing an ad-free internet for 5+ years, there's just no going back. It was terrible.

If I can't use a site without getting hit with ads I just won't use it.

If ads weren't animated and didn't interrupt content flow I wouldn't hate them so much, but they still try way too hard to pull your attention away from what you're trying to get at.

Living for years in peace without that noise is a zen you can only really appreciate after turning your blocker off.

There's just no going back.

>>57240743
>a server that's a continuous drain of money.
Well then maybe you sholdnt have riced the shit out of your web page.

Funny how that works, isnt it.

>>57240991
This guy is a fucking idiot, dont listen to him.

>>57256829
>Your security concerns aren't valid!
>You should compromise your machine so we can advertise you shit you don't need
How much do you get paid?

>>57240694
Holy fuck, I actually saw this on Uploaded or whatever. They say they use subscriptions and ads to keep the site alive.

>>57256874
You are telling people they should compromise their security and look at internet litter.
You honestly think antivirus protects people from new viruses? How do you think they get the samples to analyze?
From people already infected. And for a dollar a day, an executable can be reconfigured to NOT show up on a scan.

>>57256941
Antivirus don't protect against new viruses, and >>57240991 said the same. Why should I disable ad block when it can protect against malicious ads? As well as speed up loading time and saving bandwidth?

>>57256990
>Why should I disable ad block
>>57256941 (You) && >>57256829 (You) here,
dont fucking disable it.

holy fuck, >>57256874 sorry about that, I didnt read your whole post. I got to the "antivirus protects you from stuff that came out 10 days ago" part and thought you meant new stuff as oppose to stuff that came out a year ago.. blacked out and called you an idiot out of rage.

>>57241254
What, you get your own server with a tumblr account or what's the catch.

It's not like a site is just a bunch of uploaded pics. You need to run scripts, do templating, submit forms etc.

>>57257051
It's all good, happens to me too

>>57257085
senpai I logged in just to passfag

>https://maymay.net/blog/2014/03/01/how-to-use-tumblr-as-a-web-host-for-a-blog-you-fully-control-without-paying-anything/

check out that legit meme site for info ^

>>57240694
>ad light access for just $1
>ad light
>$1
>literally paying to use the site and they still serve ads.

lol fucking retarded faggots. Just get an an anti adblock killer.

>>57256561
>There's just no going back.
It's true.
What really gets me are those 1080p ads that blare music and yell at you to buy a new car or whatever. I saved one of those vides just to see how big it was, and the fucking thing was 50 mb. What entitled piece of shit thinks I should be forced to donate 50 mb of network use so that I can be yelled at to buy shit? I don't care if it's "not that much in the grand scheme," it makes the website fucking chug. And apparently people get "degrees" to advise companies to run these kinds of ads. Ffs.

>>57240694
>ad-light access
Yeah, go fuck yourself. If I'm paying you actual dollars I better be seeing ZERO ads, not """"light"""" ads.

>>57240743
Richard Stallman is a literal communist (who also doesn't pay his own bills), and he's worshipped on this board. What do you expect?

>>57257311
No one even mentioned RMS you sperg. Also good job at once again ignoring the valid complaints and criticisms in the thread. Fuck your ads. why anyone, who isn't working for a business, would defend online advertising is beyond me.

>>57240694
>I was going to waste your bandwidth FOR FREE, but now that you have this gate blocking me you will no longer have to deal with a leech like me. Take that!

>>57257354
To clarify: who isn't working in an online advertising business, or similar relevant field

Inadvertently hosting malware to attach onto my computer is the number one reason. I wouldn't mind helping with ad revenue, but not at the expense of the integrity of my machine.

>>57240694
Raspberry Pi + Pi-Hole will stop ads from hitting your browser. Replaces ad-blocker so no more of those messages. Kind of like shadow banning for advertising.

Actually good products shouldn't need advertising, eg. nobody really needs to be told to buy food when they're hungry

"Selling" your product in terms of advertising generally means purposely misrepresenting what it is anyway
If it were perfectly represented for what it is, advertising would have practically no effect on overall sales and therefore would just be a waste of money

if you have to rely on ad revenue to run your site it obviously has no real value.
If it did people would donate

>>57240743
stop running ads that use up 12 GiB of RAM then

>>57240694
>Uses somebody elses private property
>Complains about entitlement when he gets blocked
Free tards are pathetic.

>>57257539
>Pi-Hole
I didn't know about this. Going to try this at the weekend. ty

>>57257845
>Shilling for online advertising businesses
>For free
The marketers defense force is pathetic

>>57240694
>Run anti-ad block killer
>filter domains from search engines that it doesn't work on
I get enough shit when browsing on mobile that I ain't dealing with that. They dug their own hole, they can lay in it.

>>57244358
I don't click adverts ever but occasionally amazons botnet will find something worth shilling to me that I'll visit Amazon and buy it later. Granted I only have this issue when I use my phone, Fukkin Apple.

>free content created by someone with advertising to generate some money for themselves or their business
>OMG THEY'RE SO ENTITLED, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THIS WITHOUT ADS WTF MOM GET MY EMERGENCY TENDIES

The irony is incredible. You seriously think THEY are the entitled party. 4chan never ceases to amaze with the ever further reaching levels of being a fucking retarded cunt.

>>57257638

A good product sells itself yes, where is the product for sale on a website for written reviews of underwater-weaved baskets? That is a totally different scenario to people running ads on a website you fucking retard. How dumb can you get?

People must block advertisements. I make sure everyone I know does it. There are legitimate reasons for it, but that's irrelevant. The only reason that matters is quality. When you allow anyone to put up a website and have it be self sustaining just by putting a little box. It creates conflict of interest and dishonesty. That's why you see sensationalist titles and anything to make you click.

Quality is always second to advertisements because it's proven you're able to get revenue without effort. Much more of it in fact. MUCH MORE. Look at BuzzFeed for example.

If you remove the possibility you force out the scumbags because there's no incentive to clickbait and in fact it would be detrimental because you're putting strain on your servers. You might say that they'll just sell a product, but that won't work. MAYBE sponsored advertising, but they'd have to self sustain until then regardless.

Here's what it comes down to... If your website relies on advertisements, it shouldn't exist. Period. It has no value.

If you have a good product, you'll be fine. Same as how companies are saying pirating is killing them. It's not. People pay, but they don't pay for shit products which is what they're getting.

On top of this, you're implying people would pay if they didn't have a free option, but that's not true. They just won't use it and move on. It might actually be detrimental. If 4chan forced you to pay to use it, I guarantee you it would be the death of this site.

>>57258246
You keep posting the same arguments over and over without answering any of the points brought up against your point of view. Fuck off.
>>57258278
They obviously have nothing of worth. If a significant amount of their revenue stream can be completely nullified with one freely and widely available piece of code, maybe they should reconsider their approach to the site, how to get money, their life goals, or whatever

>>57258383

>You keep posting the same arguments over and over without answering any of the points brought up against your point of view

That was my first and only post in this thread you absolute fucking dumb cunt. Kill yourself.

>>57258636
Sorry, when I said you I meant the advertising defense force. My mistake

>>57240694
monetization ruined the internet, yt was at its best before people started making serious money, like a decade ago

>>57244027
christ, the dyslexia

>>57240694
There is no such thing as "adblocking". The web is a pull medium, not a push medium. I merely decline to request ads.

People who are against adblocking are actually saying that you aren't allowed to control what your browser displays.

These people are corporate cunts.

>>57259224
Youtube was at its best when the highest resolution you could have was 240p and you were forced to split up your videos into 10 minute chunks?

>>57244358
right before I had adblock I clicked on a world of warcraft banner ad which I then played for like 9 years

adblock is a good thing

File: 1467347260059.gif (2MB, 298x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 298x270px

>>57245346
>journalists

http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/
This is the website of the fourth-largest company in the world. It happens to demonstrate both excellent web design and acceptable advertising.
Note that in both cases, no Javascript is involved.