Where does this fucking entitlement come from? If I don't want to see your ads and you try and force me then I will just not use your site.
Problem solved.
Where does this fucking entitlement come from? If I don't want to see your ads and you try and force me then I will just not use your site.
Problem solved.
Other urls found in this thread:
arstechnica.com
washingtonpost.com
investopedia.com
kevinmuldoon.com
downloads.pagefair.com
forbes.com
emarketer.com
techcrunch.com
monetizepros.com
monetizepros.com
fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com
secure2.sfdcstatic.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
> where does this fucking entitlement come from
From owning and operating a server that's a continuous drain of money.
Maybe when you grow older, you'd understand that not anything in life is free
I think he was implying that they literally did it
>for free
and didn't care about the cost of hosting enough to push advertisements onto people enough that they would weed out u/adblock users to the point of complete alienation
Am I saying it's a smart move? No. But nothing is free. Everything operates at a cost.
The blocker in OP's pic even asks for flat out money so they can get by.
No worries, it's only the third volley in this war.
Next up is ad-blocker-blocker avoidance and ad downloading proxies to defeat the trackers.
>ad-light
so pay them and still get ads
nigga what is this site
I can sort of understand anti-ad-block sentiment but then I saw
>$1
>ad-light
burn it to the ground
It's not so they can get by.
They simply found a way to observe the number of users who were blocking the ads and were shocked by it.
The thing is though, those users were never were a source of revenue for the site. Impressions don't pay shit and click-through rates have always been 1% or less.
Most people on the internet have been consuming content for free most of the time since the dawn of internet ads.
I use adblock not because of ads, but because of viruses and shit. If they're going to force people to remove their security features they should be able to take responsibility for any damages it causes.
Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?
>I use adblock not because of ads, but because of viruses and shit. If they're going to force people to remove their security features they should be able to take responsibility for any damages it causes.
This. Antivirus programs protect you from shit that came out ten days ago. Adblock protects you from shit that came out ten minutes ago.
>Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?
Because fuck advertisers. They had their shot and have ruined their chances.
>Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?
>have an entire web page to display your ad
>have a fucking video that plays before the content the user wants to see is displayed
no friend. the people who plan ads are retards that think having the ad be more annoying will make people remember it.
if it was not for ad blockers ads would become more and more annoying.
thanks to ad blockers website owners are starting to reconsider putting a shit load of ads onto their platforms as it will make the users look for ways to remove them.
>he doesn't get all his news on the chan
How much does it cost to run a website these days? Like a dollar a month, or even less? Are you poor?
>open tumblr account
>buy 0.99c domain from Godaddy
>forward domain to tumblr account
>?????
>advertisements!
There is a lot of back and forth discussion on this topic lately.
Just to lay down some interesting details on this arena I went and looked this up.
We've had ad blockers for a while and something like 40%+ of the internet population use them now.
If they were truly causing damage to our favorite sites as so many claim
arstechnica.com
washingtonpost.com
investopedia.com
kevinmuldoon.com
we should be able to see at least these measurable effects:
- a pretty big list of sites that have closed out due to ad blocking
- a bunch of others with measurable losses in revenue
- a marked decrease in total internet ad spending (since the payments don't go out unless the ad is shown or clicked)
So let's see:
How many sites have shut down due to ad blocking?
- No one talking about it
How many sites report lost revenue due to ad blocking?
- References to a Page Fair report: downloads.pagefair.com
- More on this in a sec
How much has internet ad spending changes in the last 5 years?
- The $600 billion advertising industry, which is growing at 5% rate annually
- Budget allocation for online ads is increasing at the expense of TV and print media
- forbes.com
- Total US Ad Spending to See Largest Increase Since 2004
- Advertisers will invest more than $50 billion in digital channels in 2014 for the first time, an increase of 17.7% over 2013
- emarketer.com
- Global ad spend is on track to grow 5.5% this year to $537 billion, while Internet advertising will account for nearly one-quarter of that, at $121 billion
- This year, however, search still rules the roost
- Meanwhile, mobile continues to be a small but fast-growing proportion of business
- ZenithOptimedia says that Internet advertising will remain the fastest-growing category for ad spend, although its pace is slowing down somewhat. In 2013, it grew by 16.2% but that will decline to 16% between 2014 and 2016.
- techcrunch.com
So it seems that if any sites really have shut down just due to ad blocking, no one seems to care about them and internet ads remain a huge chunk of a $600 billion industry that is gowning at a respectable rate.
If I see that kind of message I simply won't use the site
>DO IT NOW
Why so fucking pushy?
>ad-light
fucking DROPPED
And how about the claims of lost revenues? Is there at least some substance there?
This is the best report I could find. Several sites are linking to it and claiming this is proof of the damage.
downloads.pagefair.com
> The fndings
> Ad block usage in the United States resulted in an estimated $5.8B in
> blocked revenue during 2014. It is expected to cost $10.7B in 2015 and
> $20.3B in 2016.
> The global cost of ad blocking is expected to be $41.4B by 2016.
> The botom line
> Although the 198 million MAUs in Q2 2015 represents only 6% of the
> global internet population, ad blocking is estimated to cost over $21B in
> 2015, which is 14% of the global ad spend.
^(not according to the $600B figure others are quoting)
> Methodology
> Potential digital advertising revenue was calculated by dividing the reported
> revenue for 2014 (source: eMarketer) by (1- the ad blocking rate in a particular
> country). Blocked advertising revenue was estimated as the diference between
> potential and reported revenue
So they are assuming that everyone who visits a site generates ad revenue if they are not using an ad blocker.
How do sites get paid by ads?
CPM - cost per 1k impressions
CPA - cost per action
CPC - cost per click
monetizepros.com
monetizepros.com
fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com
and for comparison secure2.sfdcstatic.com
Of those payment methods, CPM tends to pay the least for text mediums but still make up most of the site's revenue.
So that explains why TC and Huff are in this fight but their CPM numbers are driven by monthly UNIQUE visitors.
like 5 dollars
>wall of text
But yea, TLDR, your ad blocker might cost TechCrunch and the like about 22 cents per visit if you are visiting for the first time.
So the internet cost nothing to run from its inception until Adblock became popular in ~2010?
Unrequested online ads get blocked because they:
- are in the form of popups
- have sound
- use flashy animation
- use distracting colours
- contain questionable content
- contain malware
- take up bandwidth
- take up too much space on a page
Fix your advertising style, or get blocked. Very simple.
"The customer is always right" is so passe, grandpa. Get with the times. Now it's "whatever makes money is always right".
Time is money and my time won't be wasted on clicking though ads and uninstalling malware. Check yourself, faggot child.
It's your prerogative to not use the internet grandpa. Nobody will miss you.
Go back to your apps and shiny fruit logos you tech illiterate numale sack of horse excrement.
Wow there gramps, don't get all excited, you might pop up a nerve again! Harhar! Get it?
>externally applied ads
b l o c k e d
l
o
c
k
e
d
Exactly OP. I haven't read an article on Wired in almost two years because of that bullshit. Their loss - if I had liked what I read I could have purchased a subscription.
Kill yourself you fat bag of cocks. If I was your father I would've had you on the end of a clothes hanger the first chance I got. I want you have a seat and think about who would actually go to your funeral if you died today. You kids are literally worthless. Your life has zero value to me or anyone else besides yourself. I hope you die a slow and painful death and realize what a nobody you are as you drift out of your pathetic shell of a body. I would not shit on you if I was paid to do so. You are not worthy of something I have created.
yep just block everything
>Maybe when you grow older, you'd understand that not anything in life is free
factual statement
someone that runs a website should expect to be able to do so without personal financial costs
>muh tripfagging
Not that user, but I think his original post was not serious
>anti adblock notice pops up
>adblock the notice
:^)
Daily reminder that websites of actual value don't need ads to survive. For example, Wikipedia and Consumer Reports.
wikipedo shills for donations though
and google is literally an ad company
>muh jimmy wales
I'm going to keep running ublock AND adblockblockblock until ads stop being security threats.
if sites didnt have shitty ads that popup and block me from reading shit i wouldnt block them
Why do people defend sites that owe them nothing? Unless you are reimbursed for your defense of said sites? Ads can be security vulnerabilities, and unless your site is willing to pay for damages to my machine from getting infected from your site I will not unblock them.
>Why can't we create a standard for safe minimalist non-obtrusive ads and agree to let them through our add blocks?
but advertisers want to shove js into their ads and track/datamine you before the page is even done loading, so fuck them.
Would you rather have ads about your browsing history and malware?
>Pay to go to website
>Still see ads
fuck off only falcon and reverse (whos dead) are allowed to use trips
Allowed because why? They forced it upon the board for so long? They should go to reddit if they want fame so much.
The js bit is actually more due to the instant ad auctions happening on more sites.
If the site uses a js component from an ad network like AdSense then the site actually just offers a place for an ad, AdSense then:
auctions it to the highest bidder on the relevant keywords,
picks the winner,
takes payment,
delivers the ad,
skims their fee,
and drops the rest to the site owner
all in about one second or less.
The rest of the bullshit js from the actual adverts is just a byproduct of being js land in the first place
this
literally >>/out/
greasemonkey + Anti-Adblock Killer, silly goose.
>And how about the claims of lost revenues?
it's pure bullshit. The ads were always blocked, it's just that they find out how much they were blocked and thought "oh shit i'm losing all this money because of those adblockers" but in reality they never ever had that money to begin with.
If they effectively block ad blockers they will not have more money, they'll just don't have adblockers browsing their site.
Maybe they'll feel good about percentage though, like "wow i increase my % of ads-revenue/viewer, amazing".
how does having ads like "5 simple secrets found out by a mom to reverse aging" or "you can earn $627 a day working from home" help anyone
>if any sites really have shut down just due to ad blocking, no one seems to care about them
If you had a company, and your only source of revenue was through online ads, I'd tell you that your model sucks. That's not a company, that's a clickbait generator and the world is better off with it gone.
Don't worry, if you pay, then they won't have to show you ads any more! Look at how well that worked out with cable TV!
I can only imagine that in the near future, self-driving cars will stop driving if you don't look at the billboards on the side of the road
Why I never used hulu for more then the trial period
Basically, they don't make anything worth paying for, but they want LOTS of money regardless.
It's been part of western culture since copyright became a thing
>yes, i know i haven't made anything new, but keep giving me money anyways.
>mfw i dont go back to any site that pulls that shit.
It's like all the revenue lost by pay-tv not incessantly playing ads like the free-to-view channels
>Actual value
>wikipedia
Sorry, I didn't know a shithole where rhetorical skills and dedication trumped academic qualifications was of actual value
If Sup Forums and tumblr can drown out real academics and still present their ephermal bullshit as fact, it's a cancer upon society, not a valuable resource.
>consumer reports
It's like wikipedia but even less verified
Of note is how cars are ranked. A deadly unreliable honda civic will get a high rating because the problems are never reported to a dealer network or mechanic that cooperates with CR, but a high end car with a bulletproof engine will tank from shit like a moron blaming the car because he tried to adjust electronic mirrors by pushing on them really hard
You guys know the SECOND adblock and similar were to disapear we would go back to the "old" internet with flashing malicious sound playing ads absolutely everywhere.
Brave has the best idea I've seen for making people want ads and giving them greater value.
Then you merely stop using their service you tard.
Dude, they're serving up TEXT. That message is probably twice as big as the article they've blocked.
Just serve up people who use ad-blocker a pure-text version of the site and everyone's happy.
>ad-light access
wait, so they expect us to pay for *fewer* ads (as opposed to paying for *no* ads)?
Nice bait. I almost fell for it.
I've never thought of that, thanks for the idea user
I have nothing to say, so let's just point out that he uses trips. Are you not sucking his dick by giving this kind of attention to trip user?
>t.Th !e.FaLconO6
fuck off everybody knows what you're doing you retard.
in his defense, that post was a new IP to the thread
>his defense
you mean your defense
you mean check 'em
>you try and force me then I will just not use your bandwidth for free!
>people actually defend ads now
The internet has changed so much...
Do not confuse normal people with shills. Normal people did not change, and they hate ads. The proof is easy to find: ~50% (or higher) of people use some form of adblock.
Shills come in here and pretend that >1% of people want ads. I hope that ad companies that pay these shills ALL go bankrupt, and leave them stranded. Yeah, I would like fries with that.
I don't think anyone's defending them, we're just explaining to OP that threatening to leave is an asinine response to someone that has nothing to gain from you staying.
>nothing to gain from you staying
False! Web traffic is a MAJOR factor in determining site health. OP leaving and viewing content elsewhere will lower ForcedAdSite's value, and raise NoAdSite's value. When ForcedAdSite's web traffic drops, they become a less lucrative investment.
If enough people follow OP's example, ForcedAdSite will shut down.
DAILY REMINDER ads make revenue for corporations who support American government and, therefore, bringing democracy for the oppressed nations under rule of evil dictators. It's up to you will you be the enemy of America or not.
Memes aside, can anyone tell me why vanilla adblock (not ABP) is so "bad"?
You can turn the acceptable ads off, set custom filters and block social media and all that crap.
I tried ublock origin and when I went to a site I normally go to and it didn't block any of the ads.
Chinese companies make ads using slave labour. Are you a dirty commie, an enemy of freedom and democracy? Do you support slave labour?
Say NO to slavery! Say NO to ads!
I browse sites only with American ad companies :^)
I hope you're joking. Otherwise you're on stupid kid.
A true patriot. God bless!
Didnt read anything, but LOL 1$, IS THIS FOR A MONTH? IN GERMAN THOSE BASTARDS WANT UP TO 30€/MONTH FOR AD FREE LEL
>wikipedia
>website of actual value
Good one
>muh Sup Forums gold posting
kys
Why not do it from the backend?
There's 0 reason to use JS for it.
Wikipedia is largely wasteful.
>current featured article on Bud Dunn
>in pure text through gopherpedia = 8kb
>In HTML with images and stuff = 450kb
Not to mention that the script used to detect and block is probably bigger than what they're blocking.
Actually agree with the tripfag to an extent.
Popups are a no wither over what you're viewing or in a separate window ever.
Have sound is no.
Fatty video is a no in general.
Last and most important, Malware; Remember what happened with Forbes?
Ads are fine, It's just they always want to be lazy and do the least amount of effort for the most profit (which is normal) however when it doesn't work rather than adapt or clean up their act, they throw these bitch fits which puts people off even more so, which intern kills the business model.
Were "almost" past the point of no return, allot of people are just like "Fuck adds!" without understanding entirely why it was a popular stance.
fpbp
/thread
Enjoy your malware.
mind doing some bitcoin mining for me?
I mean, at least I'm asking you rather than just sneaking it onto your computer.
so... which adblocker do people use/recommend?
uGentoo
Daily reminder that Doubleclick and AdSense ToS prohibit restricting access to a website or features thereof if an ad blocker is detected.
If you come across a website using these ad networks while restricting ad blockers in any way, report them to Google to get their account terminated.
No script and add block of some sort for Firefox, using ABP still.
Chrome, I have ghostery ABP and uMatrix.. probably a bit overkill but chrome doesn't have no scrypt.
Allot of people hate ABP because of his allowed adds in default, so see what they have to say about alternatives when they complain.
>being a faggot
I'd rather keep the tripfag than an actual fag.
i'm saving them bandwidth by not downloading certain elements of their page
>We here at website.com provide a free* service for everyone**!
>*free means ad supported
>**everyone means only people who don't block ads
>ad light access
Christ.
Well they're basically saying their actual content is actually advertisements? Seems like it.
What does Sup Forums think of Sup Forums dying because of ad blocking?