How do we solve the adblock block problem?

how do we solve the adblock block problem?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wzpO-OkMMKY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>copy url
>paste to archive.is
no adblock block

what problem?

By letting the EU block adblock checkers.

Greasemonkey and Reek

>Greasemonkey and Reek
Beat me to it
/thread

Just search "anti adblock killer"

>and we do not implement any annoying ads
Then why do they want you to disable your adblocker?

Block ads servers from your router ?

By not visiting those shitty sites in the first place

Block them

>and we do not implement any annoying ads
Ads are inherently annoying. All of them. The only amount of advertising that is unobtrusive and not annoying is "none at all"

get Terry Crews on the case
youtube.com/watch?v=wzpO-OkMMKY

How do you guys monetize your content online? It's either selling your data, in-content advertising or normal ads. The latter being the best choice for the consumer imo.

When they say "annoying," they probably mean it in a reasonable sense of the word that applies to people who are at least somewhat rational, as opposed to alt right professional victim speds.

>it's totally reasonable for us to distract you and try to deceive you into spending money!
Nah, advertising is inherently unreasonable.

Fortunately it doesn't much matter, since I can still block ads on their or any other website.

Websites of actual value don't needs ads to survive. Consumer Reports survives entirely off of subscriptions.

This. I understand being willfully ignorant on the issue, using ad-block, and pretending they don't exist out of normal human selfishness. But to actively complain about advertising as a fundamental thing is just strange. Do people believe the free content they're accessing magically popped into existence on magical servers fueled with some magic alternative to electricity? How exactly does a thinking person whine about ads while using content made possible by ads?

>Websites of actual value don't needs ads to survive.
Jew please

>of actual value

I-I only use them ironically! They have no value to me! The uniquely absurd cognitive dissonance of anti-advertising loons.

Almost every site in the Alexa 50 subsists entirely off ad revenue. These are the sites that people value the most. A subscription based model is not viable at all for most actually big sites. If Google for example started requiring users to pay a subscription most of its users would just move to Bing or Yahoo, which would allow them to have more accurate results which would cause even more users to move to them. I'm almost certain that the majority of sites you use and the majority of sites you value do not rely on subscriptions for revenue.

banners are ok.
intrusive popups, redirects, new tabs are not

The annoying ones outweight the bearable, so why bother with them at all?

Pathetic excuse for being a jew. If a site wasn't of "actual value" you wouldn't need to use it so you wouldn't need to block ads.

You seem to be making the assumption that I want these """content""" companies to make money and remain in business. I don't. I would very much like to see 90% of these websites go bankrupt by having advertising become a non-viable business model.

Companies that actually have a business other than ads (e.g., they actually sell something on their site) will be fine. As will some places that produce content good enough to be worth paying for. But the Buzzfeeds and Gawkers of the world will close up shop, and it'll be a good thing for the web and the world. It's why I install uBlock Origin whenever I work on a normie's computer.

That means the content is so close to worthless that it's not worth paying for.

>hurr durr everyone on both sides is a jew

do you neo nazi shills ever give this shit a rest? kill yourself simpleton

>how dare you decline to pull our ads
ur a bad goy

I'd expect retarded logic like that to come from someone working in IT. You wanna know what would happen if advertising became a non-viable business model? You'd start to see sponsored content. These site's gotta pay the hosting bills somehow and nobody's gonna be willing to pay for them. So you'll start to see a lot more heavily biased articles disguised as actual news. I don't want this. And what about sites like Google that have undeniably provided significant value to people? Do you want them to die too? I honestly think you have this edgy cynical little retarded mindset to justify your jewishness.

>So you'll start to see a lot more heavily biased articles disguised as actual news.
You mean like we already have?

>A subscription based model is not viable at all for most actually big sites.
Then those sites do not deserve to survive.

>google
>bing
>yahoo
Use DuckDuckGo you sweaty idiots

>a lot more

Keywords there.

That's genuinely retarded.

why would I use a search engine that rarely gives the results I'm searching for?

>These site's gotta pay the hosting bills somehow
No. They can fold.
Websites aren't owed a living by the public.

>what is a host file

websites existed before ads
they were more efficient to get information from too

>rarely gives the results
I dont have that problem

No botnet
No ads
No tracking

This,
Rethink if you really need that site, moet likely not.

When it comes to news, advertising based models will always be shit because they rely on clickbait headlines. You have to pay if you want meaningful content.

What age are you? It was a lot harder to find information on the internet before search engines and social networks became big.

If Google's search results were of actual value, then people would pay for it if Google asked.

if anything that means that "sponsored content" on free sites will be a good thing. Some won't be able to survive on it and will go out of business. What remains will be so obviously shilling that it will teach the masses not to trust it. And once they no longer do, the sponsored-content companies will follow the conventional advertising companies into bankruptcy.

And we won't have a "fake news" problem anymore.

Search engines and social networks can and still do exist without using ads.

build sponsored content in a way that is still informative and enjoyable and follows the formats of unsponsored content. it requires effort, but you could do this and avoid banner ads altogether.

No that's retarded.

dont browse shit websites

It -was- more difficult in the beginning, but I think, the point is, that the internet was never created with the idea of ad monetization as an inherent right. And that's the idea that today's hosts are trying to foster - that the public is somehow breaking the "law" (at least the intended spirit, in their eyes) when they choose to block ads on their devices.

No you're retarded. Look up Searx and GNU Social.

Boycott.

They're trying to foster the idea that if you want to use ad-supported content you should unblock ads. Pretty simple and also perfectly reasonable.

Isn't Ad Nauseam supposed to get around the anti-adblock problem? It loads all the ads and internally clicks on them, right? So doesn't that fool them into thinking that you've seen the ad?

Use an Adblock Block Block.

>hey
>hey am I annoying you yet
>if you give me a dollar I'll stop annoying you
>alright cool thanks I'll be back next month to annoy you again

Why are redditors so triggered by ads (even based banner ads)?

That's literally the only solution to the ad problem. You either adopt a subscription model or you have ads.

>>No botnet
>No ads
>No tracking
until you land on a site that uses google analytics (hint: everything) and you're back to square one

>buzzwords
>am I fitting in yet?

>umatrix
>noscript

I guess but it just really rubs me the wrong way. I'd rather just watch the ads than bend over for that shit

>locate Internet backbone for your country
>:() {:|:&};:

Problem solved

dont do this it makes mustard gas

I get that, sure.

Okay, here is what I would like. Maybe it can already be done?

I want the ability to blacklist from my google searches those sites that try to use anti-adblockers.

I do not want a search result, then follow that link, only to find some message that says, "Gee user, you're crushing our hopes and dreams by not allowing our ads!" I want these sites to not get any more of my clicks (Forbes, I'm looking at you!)

umatrix and ublock fugs this shit up.

.. *to blacklist any returns to my google search results ..

Maybe this can even be a new helpful metric for hosts. To see how many people are blocking their click-bait results from even showing up on a search return.

This, most anti-adblockers I run into only check your extensions but if you use a host file it works fine. Only one website infact I use regularly throws a fuss from host file blocking

...

I do use both that's how I noticed

> I want the ability to blacklist from my google searches those sites that try to use anti-adblockers.
You want to make your browser load these sites to inspect them (as if you had clicked then) to then block them?

Clever.

Maybe try a real webbrowser on a proper microkernel multiserver OS

By using a proper adblocker with proper subscriptions. That means opening the settings, user. I know it's hard for you, but you should try.

>windows tutorial site
>can't find another that welcomes adblock users

>only the alt-right dislike advertisements!
wtf is going on

I just turn the blocker off and then selectively block the shit until just the thing I was looking for remains on the page.

what adblock block problem

>noscript
I'm gonna assume you're memeing

Why don't they just place a banner ad in this message as well? Those who know anti anti adblock will filter out anything and those like OP who don't know shit will be forced to view an ad anyways.

Not sure if bait or cognitive-dissonance.
God what happened to humanity.

1. Ad Nauseum or uBlock Origin
2. Anti Adblock Killer
3. Regular updates (think of your ad blocker like a virus scanner, you still occasionally can get fucked by zero days)
4. Occasionally manually blocking the div tag that's blocking your access to the content.

This.

No, I'd rather not use a website at all than using it with ads and other aggressive javascript code that spy on me. People need to collaborate and make sure this business model dies.

How we expect them to make money? Thats the whole point - we don't. Either find another business model or don't be a business at all.

>So you'll start to see a lot more heavily biased articles disguised as actual news.
This is completely independent from ads and already happens (unfortunately, as always).

>And what about sites like Google that have undeniably provided significant value to people? Do you want them to die too?
Holy shit, you have no idea how much I want Google to die. Google and Facebook crafted the biggest spying apparatus to ever exist and destroyed the independent web from the 90s/00s. I'd be happy if they died and free (as in freedom), decentralized alternatives came to be.

>I honestly think you have this edgy cynical little retarded mindset to justify your jewishness.
No, its you who have been brainwashed into thinking that blocking ads = stealing/something wrong anyhow.

holy shit lol so tcp/ip was developed huh?

Beautifully put. These faggots love the idea of working at home texting those top ten articles and winning money while at it. I used to have a site screen filled with content without any ad. I survived because... I have a real job.

By killing the people who actually click on ads, think about it, when was the last time you actually saw a good advertisement that you clicked on?

The worst part is that the CLICK HERE FOR BIG PENIS still somehow exists today

Adblock block block?

I saw ads for starbucks a few days ago and I there is no starbucks in my country nor neighboring countries.
I used to think the ads I see are based on my location but I guess not.

>websites that think ad block is a problem block the access to the ad block users
>they see people no longer browse their websites
>since they weren't that useful no one will give a fuck they disappeared

>a few websites will ask you to have a premium account or permit donations
>the websites worth something will survive

>a few of them are going to spy on its users as they always did

>lying on the internet
ddg give me better results than google. Not even joking.
The unique case where google is better is if I need to do a search on a particular forum post I'm looking for

>I'd rather just watch the ads than bend over for that shit
you are cucking yourself, why waste your "valuable" time watching an ad instead of paying a small fee. If the cost of the fee isn't worth it to you, that the website really isn't worth it desu.
Once websites start moving away from ads to subscription models, you'll find out where you truely want to be.

Adblockblockblock.

>site tells me to turn off adblock
I never go there again

the problem solves itself

Google, Bing, and Yahoo rely a lot on Wikipedia, which itself runs on a grant and donation funding model. (Wiki itself relies a lot on government-funded research).

Ignore it and move on. It's obvious they don't want you there so why spend your time there?

>If the cost of the fee isn't worth it to you, that the website really isn't worth it desu.
Youtube is worth a dollar a month to me, but that's not what the offer is

Every time a site does this, I just click off. 99.9% of the time I don't give a single shit. Serious business and research websites don't do this.

>A subscription based model is not viable at all for most actually big sites.
It is not my responsibility to subsidize an existing business model. If a business model does not work because there is no market demand for it, then that business should fail. It's very simple. This bullshit circular logic you kikes employ does not affect me whatsoever.
>b-but it would go out of business if-
good.

Some websites (like 8muses) can detect it even with Anti Adblock Killer. Every 3rd or 4th time I load that website it will hit me with the "Stop using adblock" page. It's annoying.

Or you use an adblocker until they provide you with a reasonable business model.

I'll go with option C. Present me with ads in a reasonable way or I will simply block them entirely and give you no revenue while using your services.

I remember a time when people ran websites as a hobby instead of using them as their career. Businesses can survive if they have something worth paying for, and hobbyists always survive.

aaklist

It's starting to fail more and more often tho.

That's why it has custom filters my dudes!