I posted this question because I once saw a tweet that said something like:
“If you use adblock, you don’t care about creator’s point blank”
What is your opinion on this? Do you agree with them?
Of course. And I’ll continue to do so as long as advertisement is detrimental to my online experience. If it wastes my time by forcing me to watch an ad before a video, if it distracts me from reading a text because of animations, if it tries to scam or shock me, I’m better off blocking it. I’m not against advertisement as communication that a useful product or service exists, I’m against advertisement abuse and greed.
I’ll happily pay for, donate to, or otherwise support services important to me that need and deserve it.
I have been with this idea for a very long time. But over time all the platforms got more and more greedy and I had the feeling that my privacy got more and more invaded.
Since that time, I have an Adblock and use DDG.
Sorry content creators.
Agree 100% with this
deleted by creator
The internet is an usuable hellhole without uBlock Origin. I don’t give two shits if creators are losing money. All you’re ‘creating’ for me is annoyance with those invasive autoplaying video abombinations.
It’s more about the mechanism of ads for me. If you ever read only a brief summary of Pavlov’s work, you will know the difference between the mechanism of brainwashing and ads (which is none). It’s not just unethical but borderline dangerous to society. The same with corruption. if you call it lobby and doing it in a suit, it’s okay… I really hope a meteor will come soon, before this shitty human race will be multi-planet trash…
If you use adblock, you don’t care about creator’s point blank
This sounds a lot like not tipping being a bad thing.
Ads and tipping denigrate my daily experience. So I’m not going to suffer either.
Blocking ads is also just more secure as it’s a vector for so many exploits.
In conclusion, I don’t agree with them at all.
I use AdBlock (and SponsorBlock on YouTube, and a cookie whitelist and a JavaScript whitelist) because only I decide what to see on my screen.
If you, as a creator, choose to use advertising to monetize your content you don’t respect the limited lifetime of the people consuming your content or their security or about the way the marketing and advertising industry is destroying our society, such as (not exhaustive, just off the top of my head right now)
- building a surveillance economy, destroying privacy in the process
- manipulating people into voting in certain ways that are harmful to them and others
- protecting harmful products from scrutiny (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, products with too much sugar or fat or low quality ingredients, the car and oil industries, corporate climate change denial,…)
- encouraging overconsumption both in terms of quantity and in terms of items or services they don’t really need
- destroying content platforms with their mantra “not advertiser friendly”, leading to dystopian self-censorship on e.g. Youtube
And then there is the way internet advertising can spread malware and compromise the security of websites in general.
If you do want to monetize content in other ways there are models such as subscriptions or Patreon-style that are a lot more respectful of the user.
Absolutely. I understand things aren’t for free, but if you make my experience subpar I’m blocking ads.
I wish more creators would make content available across more platforms.
Oh yeah, I completely forgot to mention the way the advertising industry has basically ignored every feedback from users for two decades or more by making ads ever more intrusive and obnoxious. They reap what they sow.
Counter point: Any creator blindly putting random ad networks on their site doesn’t care about their users. Every ad should be vetted and served by the creator, those kinda ads are impossible to mass-block. If an ad swindles a user, it should be the creators reputation thats at stake.
I stopped having a bad conscience for blocking when one blog who begged promised to not autoplay any audio. The very next day it of course showed a very loud ad, and the creator excused it with “he didn’t have any control over what the advertisement network showed”.
This is exactly what I was thinking. How many incredibly sketchy, scammy, or outright invasive ad scripts are we supposed to tolerate? For me the answer is “none” and I’m quite happy that way.
They’re creators alright, but what are they creating? The answer is a surveillance capitalist dystopia.
yes, because no ads basically means my antivirus software has nothing to do. Creators have no choice over what ads are served up with the content and 99% of ads are loaded with malware whether you click on them or not.
Creators need to come up with better ways to monetise their content instead of relying on them.
As the de facto IT guy for my family, I block ads on all their computers just as a basic safety measure.
I can usually spot a fake download button and avoid scammy sites, but my parents and grandparents seem magnetically attracted to them
Plus there are ads now that give you plague just by loading them, which is uniquely horrifying to those of us who are informal tech support. D:
“If you don’t pledge fealty to your feudal Lord, you don’t care about the artists for which he is patron.”
I don’t care about creators who demand that I surrender my privacy as the only valid show of support for them.
Adblockers are absolutely necessary because ads are a malware threat, never mind the scams and invasive popups. The cReAtOrS didn’t care enough to ensure advertisements were safe, legitimate, or not horribly obnoxious so they did it to themselves.
I used to allow ads for certain sites but after malware attempts and scam ads, I block them across the board. If that upsets anybody, go whine to the shady advertises who made this a necessity to browse the web safely.
I do everything under the sun pretty much. Ublock origin, NoScript, chameleon extensions on Librewolf (and others). I “subscribe” to YouTube channels via rss feeds. Open up the newsboat feed reader from my terminal and an extension called “Alter” redirects me to an invidious instance. NoScript blocks everything pretty much as I just need the url. Then I use yt-dlp with the sponsorblock flag.
I only visit YouTube when I have a bunch of new “subs” that I found through word of mouth (reading blogs, HN, Mastodon, Lemmy, etc). I could just use invidious rss feeds, but if the instance goes down I would have to start all over again. There are other ways of achieving this same effect, but this is how I choose to consume yt now.
I own my computer, and I control what is displayed on it. I can do anything I want to control what is and isn’t on my screen. It is not my problem if the majority of content is reliant on an ineffective monetization method.
I do wish someone would make an ad block that faked impressions. But it would probably lose the advantages of fast load times, security etc.
I stopped using Ad Nauseum because at some point I needed the latest update of uBlock Origin and haven’t switched back, but it fakes clicks. Not sure if it’s actually effectice, but the express purpose is moreso to throw off targeted advertising iirc.
This plugin supposedly kind of does that. I remember a few years ago Google removed it from the Chrome store, which I took as a good sign.
I never gave it a go though so I don’t know how well it works nor if it’s maintained; not only am I a bit too lazy to try to do some of that research myself, I also don’t browse that many different websites to consider I could have relevant data.
Removed by mod