I'd love to believe that, but I felt much the same way in the double-dickities, when popups and popunders were rampant, and popup blockers started becoming common place. Eventually, only the oldest and least tech literate of people still had browsers that allowed popups, and they started to go away. It seemed like advertising like that was going away, but it didn't, it just changed, and instead of opening in a new window, it just opens as a DIV in the same one. Only this time it's controlled by the same javascript that is required to make the site even work, so it probably won't ever go away.

Cue the rise of ad-blocker-blockers where you're faced with a) allow a possible vector of malware or b) don 't consume the site et all.

Of course at some point there might be ad-blocker-blocker-blockers which will postpone the problem to another round. But do we really want an economy based on an arms race?

> ad-blocker-blocker-blockers

An ad-blocker-blocker-blocker is just an ad-blocker.

Not quite.

An ad-blocker removes ads.

An ad-blocker-blocker detects ad-blockers and refuses to serve content if one is detected. (Instead a "disable your ad-blocker if you want to use this site" message is shown)

An ad-blocker-blocker-blocker masks the ad-blocker against detection, so content can still be consumed.

Etc...

I think that's optimistic. As thesuitonym says, when bad internet advertising is blocked, it evolves into even worse (and less blockable) advertising. We're already seeing the rise of "native advertising," i.e. "pay websites to run ads masquerading as their own content."