How come (((they))) allow this?

How come (((they))) allow this?
A simple program loses billions and billions of $ yearly to the online industry.Surely big corporations should me more worried about it, but no one seems to care much, weirdly enough.
Yeah, some sites block their content for adblock users, some ads try to outsmart it, etc, but it general, adblock thrives .Im really surprised that google for example still hasnt found a way to completely get rid of it, im sure adblocks fuxks their income a lot

Other urls found in this thread:

adage.com/article/digital/inside-google-s-secret-war-ad-fraud/298652/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

That's why the less people use adblockers the better.

it just decreases it by a little bit

use FF + ad nauseam, that literally fucks them over

kek

those jews are starting to ban free speech and besides that they have enough money to buy your soul a thousand times over without batting an eye

the more ppl fuck with them the better

stop making this exact same thread all the times

Literally the first time i make this thread

My theory is (((they))) only allow it because if you wouldn't use an adblocker, you wouldn't click ads anyway. For pay per click ads, nothing would change in that case. For pay per view ads, people that don't use adblock to begin with might actually be interested in the products displayed in the ads. If all adblock people would stop blocking ads (and just ignore them), pay per view ads would have a much lower "gained-customer-per-view" ratio. This would initially be bad for the company seeking to advertise, as they'd pay more for an equal amount of customers drawn in, but ad prices would soon go down so the jew company can keep their customers. So in the end it would barely matter if you use an adblocker or not.

Enter AdNauseam shilling mode: AdNauseam would not only "fuck over" the pay-per-view ads like not having an adblocker would do (resulting in no actual damage to ad revenue due to quantity going up and prices going down equally), but also fuck pay-per-click ads, which causes the same as above, but also includes click fraud, which leads the company to say: "People are clicking our ads, which implies they are interested, but they don't buy our crap, something is wrong here.", versus above's likeliest outcome: "People are seeing our ads, but not clicking them, they aren't interested, we need to step up our game."

Maybe this theory is entirely wrong and I fell for a jewish trick, in which case, wew lad.

I have clicked on ads several times by mistake before I got an adblocker and I'm sure that's the case with many people. Also is it actually possible for people to actually enjoy ads on the Internet? I'm sure the reason some people don't use an adblocker is probably because of ignorance.

Few sites have put antiadblock on their websites so it is an issue and half the people don't know about software that can block the antiadblock. Also if I'm not mistaken adblock on mobiles is a lot less common, I myself don't use an adblock on my mobile. Mobile Internet traffic is increasing so maybe when adblocks on mobile become common they'll really try to do something about it.

>implying all the ad blocking aps arent lowkey developed and owned by google
top goy

Well Google is going to block their competitors in Chrome now...

more and more traffic is shifting from desktop to mobile and with only about 1% of all mobile users using an adblocker things are still looking great compared to the ~25% in the western world on desktops. owning the operating system also allows them to limit easy access to adblockers for normies.

Because only like 2% of internet users uses it.

more like 40% and steadily rising

they don't get to 'allow' anything, there's no way to force me to display ads

>pulling numbers from your ass

>loses
>"loses"
>(((loses)))
Without a sale there is no money made. No real money is made without a product sale.
We could reasonably assume that someone who chooses to block ads does so because they would never use them or click on them or ultimately buy a product via ads. Another reasonable assumption is said blocker does not wish to be overtly or subconsciously manipulated by product placement, and it would be morally correct to respect their choice.

If someone makes money from showing me an ad, but I never buy any product or interact with the ad in any manner, no money was lost, I did not purchase something. That business model runs off of imaginary factors of involvement such as "impression".

Yeah but a lot of companies place ads just to keep themselves in your consciousness. For example coca cola, everyone already knows what it is, they're just advertising to continue to keep it in your brain. Even when you're not thinking about coca cola, you've seen an ad for it recently so it's percolating around in your subconscious. Then when you go to buy a soda, you might not buy a coke BECAUSE of the ad, but just because it seems "right" somehow, whereas a no-name soda would seem "weird"

It's not necessarily that an ad convinces you to buy something, it's more like a long term strategy of building this spot in your brain for the product over the course of your entire life.

Actually read my post this time and then delete your reply.

sry

why, he's right

People that install it aren't in the market anyway. If anything, it prevents accidental clicks.

Wouldn't be surprised if Google contributes code to uBlock and others for this very purpose.

He created an argument (Yeah, but) about a specific topic I already covered iny post.

>another reasonable assumption is if the person blocking does not wish to be overtly or subconsciously manipulated

So I said
>lern 2 reed, phaggit

>to the online industry

Some fucking good that (((industry))) does. If they can't survive without that model they should fucking die.

Every single medium that has depended on ads ends up being kike shit, starting with the traditional lügenpresse.

>Also is it actually possible for people to actually enjoy ads on the Internet?
jlist ads come to mind, I'm always down for seeing qt anime grills.

I use Ublock Origin and uMatrix with all the advanced options checked, so you can do javascript filtering much better than noscript which is literal malware. Whenever noscript updates itself you get redirected to a scam site to install "PC Boost" type shit.

What the fuck is going on with this thread and those retarded parentheses

prologfags

Most users aren't advanced enough to is blockers.

No it doesn't, you're just a dumbfuck that got infected lmao

>willingly using extra bandwidth as a "fuck you"
>get blacklisted from ads
And the same result happens, except I can't watch my videos without any buffering.

It means Jews for people who realize how ridiculous they sound when all they say is "Jews".

If I was Google, I would actually invest in AdNauseam. Not publicly, of course. This is an excellent way to dominate the market even harder and stomp out the competition. All you need is to fill the internet with more white noise which others will have trouble filtering. Google, with its machine learning, won't.

The only people who can really fuck over Google are so called blackhat marketers. They are real pros. To generate fake clicks, they have an arsenal of sophisticated botnets and they often use malware on normies' computers. They're not volunteers, they have a strong financial incentive to click-spam their competitors. AdNauseam is baby-tier. Google has seen it all before. It has fought click wars for more than a decade.

Those refunds you keep talking about do not even come from AdNauseam traffic. They come from professional blackhat botnets that imitate user behavior and are only detected post factum. AdNauseam doesn't even load the page. AdNauseam follows primitive, easily recognizable patterns. AdNauseam traffic is filtered immediately.

Do you think that amateur AdNauseam fanboys are smarter than blackhat gurus? I don't think so.

Here is some insight on how Google battles them. This is from 2015, before AdNauseam took off.
adage.com/article/digital/inside-google-s-secret-war-ad-fraud/298652/

So, what do we have in the end? Google's competitors who use outsourced pajeet coders make heavy losses, advertisers just flock to Google because it's the one who can combat click fraud best. Google strengthens its monopoly. Wow, what a victory.

The only thing AdNauseam really does is playing into Google's hands. I am pretty sure the thread is full of Google shills who promote AdNauseam to kill competition and advance their "anti-hate speech" agenda. Every AdNauseam shill can be declared a Google shill at this point.

Oh yea, have fun passing your real IP address, location and ISP each time an ad is clicked. You are truly doing a good goy's job.

>Im really surprised that google for example still hasnt found a way to completely get rid of it
it's not like they couldn't do the same think they did to adnauseum -- remove it from the chrome appstore and flag it as malware so you can't install it from non-appstore locations either
they're just not doing that because it would lead to shitty PR

the people paying for ads aren't losing anything
they people who sell ads to those chumps are losing something, though. ad providers get paid per pageview or per click, not per actual purchase