News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by major ad networks. Parent comment

Re:VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by maj... by peeky on Tuesday June 14, 2016 @11:22AM (#11902543)
I've actually emailed the Guardian before to say I would gladly pay at least whatever they earn from my ad impressions to have an ad-free site. They just pointed me to the mobile apps where this is already an option.

I wish more sites offered an alternative to the dilemma of UX-breaking ads vs ad blocker guilt.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by maj... by agarden on Tuesday June 14, 2016 @11:49AM (#11902795)
You can pay them $49/year. If that doesn't remove the ads, then install an ad blocker that you turn on for just their site.

https://membership.theguardian.com/us/supporter?INTCMP=ADBLO...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by maj... by lostlogin on Tuesday June 14, 2016 @03:58PM (#11904857)
The idea of paying them then paying someone else to remove their shit is a little insane. Until that is resolved, I pay for my ad blockers. The added bonus is that I can remove any content I don't like (lifestyle stories about our rugby players).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:VPAID ads destroy performance and are still served by maj... by Fiahil on Tuesday June 14, 2016 @04:33PM (#11905108)
Ad blocker guilt? Never felt that.
[ Parent | on HN ]