News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Edward Snowden says it's your 'duty' to install ad blockers by tremon on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @05:50PM (#10584594)
No. Clicking a link does not constitute consenting to ads, as the link itself does not come with any legalese saying so. And since I'm already using an adblocker by default, the content as displayed on my screen gives no indication whether or not I'm missing anything. So me being a return visitor is also not any indication that I've consented to whatever my browser is not showing.

There are a few sites that don't work at all with an adblocker, and those sites I'm happy to not visit again. But the whole "consent by default" is not a valid interpretation of consumer law in the EU, whether you phrase it as freeloading or not.

In fact, my browser is muted by default, and I always mute TV commercials (used to have a mythtv plugin for it, even). Are you now going to accuse me of stealing for protecting the silence of my own home?

Re:Edward Snowden says it's your 'duty' to install ad blockers by nickpsecurity on Tuesday November 17, 2015 @06:57PM (#10584915)
I already agreed with another commenter that I should've exempted the first click. The rest of your arguments seems to go like this.

1. You know that most of the web's content is paid for with ads.

2. You've installed an ad-blocker to prevent them from loading.

3. You didn't see them when you do so it doesn't count.

That's a funny argument, right there. You could just as easily cover your eyes as you're driving through traffic and make the same argument. However, you knew what would be ahead of you, the significance, and made the decision anyway for selfish reasons. Fine if you do as I run an adblocker, too.

Strange that so many pretend like they aren't ripping off sites giving them content or a huge uptake of this wouldn't damage those same sites. Why do you keep pretending?

"In fact, my browser is muted by default, and I always mute TV commercials (used to have a mythtv plugin for it, even). Are you now going to accuse me of stealing for protecting the silence of my own home?"

Did you blank the content that the ads paid for, as well? Or just your end of the arrangement? I'm accusing you of talking content while blocking what pays of it. If it's not stealing, it's something very similar.

Many ads are visual or textual, though, so I'm not sure why you're bringing up the silence of your home as a counter to all ads except as a reframing of the discussion to make your ad-avoidance seem more sensible. Realistically, you don't care if they loose money and go out of business so long as you get the content with little to nothing in return. That's your actual position.

Re:Edward Snowden says it's your 'duty' to install ad blockers by tremon on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @06:58AM (#10587183)
I don't pretend. You make it seem like I need to defend my choice of using an adblocker, I disagree with that premise. There is no sales contract, and I have no obligation to waste my attention on webpage ads anymore than I have an obligation to listen to TV commercials. There is no moral argument to be had either, as long as we ignore the morality of user profiling by the same ad community.

Besides, the cash flow for ad monetization is so convoluted that it would be very hard to conclusive demonstrate financial harm by my actions.

Re:Edward Snowden says it's your 'duty' to install ad blockers by nickpsecurity on Wednesday November 18, 2015 @11:10AM (#10588492)
The user profiling and obscure cash flow I agree with. They certainly have to get some shit straight on their end, too. Haha.