-16

Genuine question as I'm having a dilemma.

I've seen many of my friends using Chrome without any ad blockers. Most of them don't even know that there are things called extensions that can be installed. Whenever I use their laptops, I want to throw them away. I want to tell them about extensions and ad blockers.

But as much as we hate ads, they fuel the internet. Without them, the internet wouldn't be what it is today. If ad blocker users increase, there would be a massive change in the web, and everything may be paywalled.

So should we gatekeep ad blockers and enjoy an ad-free internet as a minority? It's not like they know what they're missing.

I advocate for FOSS, though. I will tell my friends to try Linux and dual-boot it, and suggest alternatives.

all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] tacticalsugar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 61 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

But as much as we hate ads, they fuel the internet. Without them, the internet wouldn’t be what it is today.

The corporate web wouldn't be what it is today, the internet would be fine. This is an important distinction to make. The internet is run by a bunch of nerds going to "internet peering conventions" and paying for BGP cross-connects in data centers. They would be fine, because ad-blockers don't hurt them.

The corporate web, on the other hand, would die. I'm very okay with that. In fact, I see that as a feature, not a bug. I hate the corporate web, and I think the world would be better without facebook and google creating monopolies on communication. But either way, if the only way technology can survive is ads (and it's not the only way), then let it die.

So should we gatekeep ad blockers and enjoy an ad-free internet as a minority? It’s not like they know what they’re missing.

lolno. We should be doing everything we can to protect ourselves and those around us from malware, surveillance capitalism, and predatory advertising. Even if you don't care about other people, herd immunity to malware and surveillance capitalism are very real things. It's a lot harder to get infected by malware on an immunized network, and it's a lot harder for facebook to surveil you (remember shadow profiles?) when nobody around you is having their every step tracked.

Consider why those people don't even know about extensions or ad-blocking. The web was built to be extensible, but ad companies (google) have done everything they can to keep people from realizing they can just change websites however they want, including blocking ads. People aren't ignorant about privacy because they want to be, they're ignorant because a lot of money and manipulation has gone into keeping them unaware and unempowered.

Solidarity and support are the only real weapons we have in the war against surveillance and malvertising. If not for those around you, then at least do it for the sake of your own privacy.

[-] kbal@fedia.io 41 points 3 months ago

I'm old enough to have seen the Internet without ads. It was better.

[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Remember having a toolbar for your toolbar's toolbar? It was a simple, more innocent time.

[-] DmMacniel@feddit.org 1 points 3 months ago

Don't forget ActiveX Objects which could run code outside your browser, and for some strange reason was required for windows update to function.

[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 33 points 3 months ago

Ad blocker is a terrible misnomer. Go to ublock's github and read the README. Ublock's primary purpose is to protect your right to privacy. Blocking ads is a consequence.

That given, your question could be reframed as "I don't have spyware and my friends do. Should I tell them how to protect themselves at the risk of being spied on again?" An ethical dilemma where only a coward makes the wrong choice.

[-] XTL@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 months ago

This exactly. It's more like a firewall for your browser. Because web browsers are incredibly crap software that's pretty completely ignored privacy and filtering along their development and it's being slowly patched on in tiny kludges and extensions instead of being set in policy from the start.

Of course spam and malware is a hard problem in web browsers. It's been a hard problem everywhere else, too.

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 33 points 3 months ago

Yeah no. Ad blockers for everyone. Death to the corpo web. Death to youtube and all other ad driven platforms.

[-] tacticalsugar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 3 months ago

Browsers of the world unite, we have nothing to lose but our ads!

[-] ssm@lemmy.sdf.org 33 points 3 months ago
[-] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 25 points 3 months ago

But as much as we hate ads, they fuel the internet. Without them, the internet wouldn’t be what it is today.

Indeed, because of relying on ad revenue, journalism has given way to sensationalist click bait factories, and interesting or unique content is drowned out by invasive and manipulative commercial interests in search results .

If ad blocker users increase, there would be a massive change in the web,

Sounds pretty good to me.

[-] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago

they fuel the internet

no they don't

they fuel shitty companies

[-] krolden@lemmy.ml 22 points 3 months ago

Yeah the internet wouldn't be what it is today: complete shit.

[-] XTL@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

Internet is better than ever. The web is the broken part.

[-] apotheotic@beehaw.org 12 points 3 months ago

"Let others suffer with ads so I can have a cost-free browsing experience"

I'd much rather pay to support platforms that enrich my browsing experience, than continue allowing the ad-fuelled, spyware ridden, clickbait filled internet to continue even one more day.

Ad blockers for all, until we don't need them anymore!

[-] scottmeme@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago

Everything is already headed to a point of being paywalled, I wouldn't say there's any reason to not spread the word and let more people know.

The FBI also encourages the use of them.

[-] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago

Ad block users are already the minority.

Adblockers are a must have for protecting against mailware and phishing attacks. Google and other ad services have proven to be incompetent in protecting their service against those kind of attacks targeting users.

[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

Less so than you'd believe. Over 30% of people use them

[-] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago
[-] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

https://backlinko.com/ad-blockers-users

If you search 'percentage of people who use ad blockers' on ddg you find the same thing on several sites. I found it unbelievable too, but given multiple sites, I'll take it at face value. I don't have time to deep dive everything. Let me know if you find anything to the contrary.

[-] ShortN0te@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Not much information on the data. But still some critique of the data:

  1. the source claims

"use ad blocking tools at least sometimes" so not all the time

  1. It is only 16-64

Both of those metrics exclude lots of data for example, when you scroll down you see that yes a lot of ppl use ad blocker on the PC but not on phones or tablets. Also ppl below 16 have a very low usage rate also ppl above 64.

I think actually ad block usage by sites visited with and without ad blockers would be nice too.

But thank you for the link, guess ad blockers are indeed more popular than i thought.

[-] DmMacniel@feddit.org 10 points 3 months ago

Donationware >>> Adware

[-] Onihikage@beehaw.org 8 points 3 months ago

Web ads are a security risk that even the FBI has acknowledged, so your friends should be aware that having uBlock Origin installed is nearly as important as having virus protection.

[-] autonomoususer@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You should be ashamed when your life is so worthless that you can waste it watching ads.

This must be reduced to one word, to spread fast, like other topics have simp, cuck and coomer.

[-] j4k3@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I believe my digital person is a part of me. Anyone collecting and owning any part of my person with intent to manipulate me in any way, is stealing a part of my person. I call that digital slavery.

The third pillar of democracy, as we all learned in early primary school, is freedom of information through a free press. The Press, does not mean corporate media owned by a few shitty billionaires. It means freedom of information. There are only 2 relevant web crawlers, Google's and Microsoft's. It doesn't matter where you search the web, the query is going through one of these two crawlers directly or through the third party API. This is like if a hundred years ago, all newspapers were sold by one of two companies. The worst part is that, at the present, search results are not deterministic. If we both search for the exact same thing, the results will be different. This is a soft coup on the third pillar of democracy.

[-] Zyansheep@programming.dev 4 points 3 months ago

I would agree if ads were the only sustainable way to fund content on the internet. They're not. Direct fractional funding should be the universally accepted scheme and until companies figure that out, adblock all the way!

[-] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Never change a running System.

this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
-16 points (39.2% liked)

Privacy

31609 readers
227 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS