Is this the future we wanted?
Is this the future we wanted?
Other urls found in this thread:
github.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
>1950
>newspaper has ads
>don't read them
>2016
>site has ads
>block them
this is no future
The better question is, is this the future we deserve?
USA Today is an embarrassment of a national newspaper anyway.
I've seen them reporting anonymous reddit posts as facts in their articles.
Go on and save it. It's all yours, my friend. :^)
github.com
>reading american news
found your problem amerifat.
Why don't you just pay for your content?
lol
>Why don't you just pay for your content?
Because the news companies that needs ads don't have a demographic willing to pay for their shit.
How does it feel major news outlets, tv programs are all paid shills paid to spout bullshit, lies and fake opinions into your mind?
Fuck News organizations, hang em all.
gracias, familia
What do ad blockers have to do with free speech?
lol this is one fucking hell of an argument USAtoday
> doublespeak
> falseflag
Fallacy bingo.
Help me, what is happening here?
>1950
>see an ad, don't magically contract HIV
>2016
>see an ad, flash exploit infects my computer with a virus
they are really grasping for straws when it comes to things to congratulate Hillary for
Because being strong doesn't mean mightier.
>No, but it's the one we need right now.
>not editing page's source code to hide it
it's not our fault if you're stupid
The creation and publication of software which empowers the user to choose what they do, or do not, want their user-agent to load, and to create, curate and manages lists of the same, is free speech.
>HIV
>1950
I will never turn off my adblocker or stop pirating shit
If I'm going to be a slave to technology for the rest of my life I might as well soften the impact
This is why i never recommend adblockers, even if i use them myself.
The more people use it, less useful they become.
Free speech means the government can't prevent you from speaking your opinions.
It doesn't give you the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theatre.
False. The more people refuse adverts the sooner the normalfag web will die. The web should have stayed non-commercial. Install an AdBlocker for a normalfag today.
what sort of false logic is that?
>The web should have stayed non-commercial
to me this seems like an inevitability, so much so that I can't think of what "non-commercial web of 2016" would look like. do you perhaps have an idea?
>Hillary Clinton sort of, kind of, almost
Impressive... so this... is the power of a female president.
I can't wait for her to sort of, kind of, almost enact meaningful changes for the better.
Last semester at uni I evangelized my entire CMST class. Had to browse the web to get a PPT while my thinkpad was hooked up to a projector and people asked why there was all the white space on the sides of the page. Told them about UB:O and showed them how simple it was/how many ads they are forced to see without realizing it.
Most didn't even know what an extension was.
writing is an action
thought is becoming an action as well
>site has greyed out overlay like this
>right click block element
>choose the blue box
>right click again block element
>highlights the entire dark greyed area covering the screen
>save both
>browse USA today without popups
yes, this is the future we wanted
Just stop reading that shitty site.
They can serve up simple ads without using all kinds of tracker cookies.
Plenty of other news outlets.
I haven't seen the liberal press work this hard since bush/dukakis -- yes, I am old enough to remember that. :(
the only way to truly combat popupblockers or needing to register to see something is when sites like Pintrest actually format the site to literally stop you from scrolling it without being signed in.
also i think New York Times or Post has something similar where only a portion of the article is shown until you become a member
also a lot of the popular porn streaming sites have started throttling your connection if it sees adblockers and they throw something stupid like "our videos have known issues if you use an adblocker"
but then you can just save the stream with DTA in firefox (since their jewish buffering speeds are too slow for single threaded chrome/opera downloading unles you want to wait an hour for a 10 minute porno)
...
>2016
>flash ads
>USA Today
Just don't visit their shitty website. Easy.
Let them go bankrupt.
>Block element
>Problem solved
>shouting 'Fire!' as an opinion
thanks never heard of this added it to my tampermonkey scripts and adblock lists. works flawlessly.
>gold in shooting goes to America
wew
People pay money to read Consumer Reports and they accept no advertising revenue. Yet they still have the money to buy a bunch of overpriced products to test.
People donate to Wikipedia but they don’t get anything as a reward. Even the freeloaders get the same access as them.
If your content is worth a damn, then people will pay for it.
>Someone shouts FIRE
>You shout 'Shut the fuck up im trying the watch the movie'
>It's a literal episode of Seinfeld where you are carried out on the shoulders of the grateful crowd
oh wow Wikipedia
consumer reports is a non-profit
did somebody say FIRE!?
It's very typical of american lugenpresse
go back to your hole
go back to yours
What’s your point?
>2016
>still implying there resides within Microsoft any semblance of an entity who cares what you want
Nice dubz bro xD
I'm pretty comfortable with reality tyvm
Found the tumblrina
fuck off Sup Forumstards are just as bad
every other post is about how much they hate someone but if you dare question the narrative you get a round of salty replies from anons spouting the latest sanctioned talking points.
I'm not offended, it's just pathetic
Does anyone deserve anything?
Whatever you say, Shlomo.
exactly
Just disable JS on that site, it will be fine.