Re:DuckDuckGo has had 0 search warrants since founding in 2008
by berkes on Monday October 18, 2021 @02:43PM
(#28909633)
> negatively impact the little guy’s bottom line
We are talking about Google here. How is blocking ads from Google "impacting the little guys's bottom line"?
Re:DuckDuckGo has had 0 search warrants since founding in 2008
by skinnymuch on Monday October 18, 2021 @02:49PM
(#28909738)
The posts were about blocking ads en mass. Not about blocking Google specifically. It would be incredibly rare for some one to get ublock or something similar and only block multi billion dollar companies.
Re:DuckDuckGo has had 0 search warrants since founding in 2008
by nitrogen on Monday October 18, 2021 @06:58PM
(#28912880)
It's the smaller ad networks and obscure sites that are more likely to have malware sneak into the ads, though, so it's safer to block everything.
Re:DuckDuckGo has had 0 search warrants since founding in 2008
by skinnymuch on Tuesday October 19, 2021 @06:44PM
(#28924681)
Sure. I could have similar or different but nonetheless reasons for software and apps. Maybe somehow getting around a SaaS app. Or for other circumstances like finding random people on the web to split a substack or Stratchery subscription with (the latter happened on Twitter and people were not pleased).
The reason doesn’t change my point. The smaller person is hurt by any of these actions when done to their thing - ad blocking, piracy, workarounds, etc.
Edit: to clarify. I don’t think any less of any one for doing whatever or me being better than any one.
^there are exceptions. I’m sure if I needed to use Photoshop for a day I’d do something akin to pirating. In this case I don’t think it’s a big deal with Adobe being worth $300B.