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?
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.
Faking impression is extremely hard to do, there are billion dollar companies out there that exist literally to stop ad fraud as their primary purpose.
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’d say that ads don’t care about creators.
We should be paying creators for content and that’s not what ads do.
The story of internet ads is a classic greed to ruins fable. People put up with static picture and text ads for a very long time, and many, myself included, still don’t mind them. In fact, self-hosting picture and text ads is almost guaranteed to get through adblockers.
But then the ads started moving. They started playing sound. They started executing code and phoning home to third party servers and collecting user data without consent. They started consuming more system resources than the webpage itself. Malware started being distributed through it, and there was even a recent breakthrough of ad cryptominers, because, again, they literally execute arbitrary code on your computer!
At this point our trust in ads are irreversibly broken. We will never tolerate ads again like we did when they hadn’t done all this, even if they promises to clean up their act. Adblock was developed as not just something to remove unsightly ads, but also, and I do not exaggerate when I say this, as a line of defense for the security and usability of your computer. It’s like an antivirus, but it kicks in before the virus even reaches your computer! For this reason, I think adblockers are not only okay to have, but essentially a mandatory item for browsing today’s internet. If you want revenue in spite of that, maybe set up a tip jar and/or go back to self-hosted text and picture ads, I’m not disabling adblock and opening myself to harm because, no offense, I genuinely do not trust you.
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.
