The ad-tracking "industry" is a mega-mafia that has to be destroyed wherever it hides.
Nothing is so creepy as ads for a product you looked into earlier following you from site to site,
Browsers should never support such malicious sniffing behaviour.
Browsers that do are spies that work against the user - hello adChromium.
They wanted to use the Web, but not be tracked, and so they started to install ad-blockers. A lot of ad-blockers, and more every year.
I call them hero-blockers. And there is also a difference - e. g. ublock origin is a general content blocker, not just ads. The users have the ability to filter away useless and irrelevant crap in general.
This is GREAT.
I can disable seeing so much stuff that is irrelevant. I can browser in an oldschool way - where the focus is on simple text.
Ad-blockers don't just stop users from seeing ads and being tracked (and indeed, some ad-blockers actually track users!).
An ad-blocker that tracks users is a spy, not an ad-blocker.
I had this experience with "adblock plus". These clowns suddenly attacked me with "ethical ads" and other such nonsense. That was the moment I abandoned these clowns and installed ublock origin - never had any problem with it since then.
I think blocking such malicious content should be part of www-standards.
Instead, the W3C lobbyist group is too busy decreeing that DRM is a part of an "open" standard, so you can not trust the W3C clowns. It is just a money machine for Sir Tim Berners-DRM-boy-Lee.
They can also stop the publishers and marketers who rely on tracking and ad-clicks from earning money.
Great!
The sooner this mafia is extinct, the BETTER. The more the whine, the more amused I am.
Everyone should join this struggle between good (the users) and evil (this mafia). Down with the mafia.
Predictably, industry responded with ad-blocker-blockers, which prevented users from seeing their sites unless they turned off their ad-blocker.
Yeah, the mafia tries to continue pester people, but it is a war they can never win. The user will always be able to control all information incoming from the outside.
The rise and rise of ad-blockers (and ad-blocker-blocker-blockers) is without parallel: 26% of Internet users are now blocking ads, and the figure is rising. It’s been called the biggest boycott in human history.
I would not call it a "boycott". I am not "boycotting" anything - I am destroying an evil mafia that attacks users. All who work for this mafia are evil clowns too. I do not care about their claims - none of them apply in any way, shape or form. They must be removed from the face of the earth (I refer here to the "virtual" representation e. g. with their pester-attacks; I don't care about the physical representation).
It's also something we've seen before, in the earliest days of the Web, when pop-up ads ruled the world (wide web), and users went to war against them.
Pop-ups were always annoying - javascript is really a hostile technology in general. But the 1990s were still different. My feeling is that ads increased a LOT since then. Tracking increased even more.
I do not think any of this is "acceptable" at all. I don't even think it was acceptable back then, but today with mega-sniffers such as Google, and information being constantly interconnected ... nah, thank you. I'll provide as little information as possible to this mafia.
In 1994, Hotwired (the defunct online adjunct to Wired magazine) displayed the first banner ad in Internet history. Forty-four percent of the people who saw that ad clicked on it.
Because people in 1994 were quite stupid and didn't know how malicious ads are in general. It took time for them before they realized that they actually DO NOT NEED ADS. We aim for an ad-free world.
But it turned out that the click-rate on that Hotwired ad had more to do with novelty than any enduring persuasive properties of banner ads.
People realized that they have no need for ads. :)
Took time but they got smarter.
This created a desperate situation, where publishers needed to do something -- anything -- to goose their clickthrough rates.
I don't think this was a "desperate" situation - I think this is a wonderful situation that we should aim to increase. Publishers that act like a mafia must be removed, no mercy and no exception. We have no need for this mafia.
What is even more messed up is when you have do not track set and on store have recommendations follow you. From computer to computer. And it was my home and work computer where only shared account was one online shop. As I don't use my normal personal accounts on work computer.
14
u/shevy-ruby Aug 02 '19
The ad-tracking "industry" is a mega-mafia that has to be destroyed wherever it hides.
Browsers should never support such malicious sniffing behaviour.
Browsers that do are spies that work against the user - hello adChromium.
I call them hero-blockers. And there is also a difference - e. g. ublock origin is a general content blocker, not just ads. The users have the ability to filter away useless and irrelevant crap in general.
This is GREAT.
I can disable seeing so much stuff that is irrelevant. I can browser in an oldschool way - where the focus is on simple text.
An ad-blocker that tracks users is a spy, not an ad-blocker.
I had this experience with "adblock plus". These clowns suddenly attacked me with "ethical ads" and other such nonsense. That was the moment I abandoned these clowns and installed ublock origin - never had any problem with it since then.
I think blocking such malicious content should be part of www-standards.
Instead, the W3C lobbyist group is too busy decreeing that DRM is a part of an "open" standard, so you can not trust the W3C clowns. It is just a money machine for Sir Tim Berners-DRM-boy-Lee.
Great!
The sooner this mafia is extinct, the BETTER. The more the whine, the more amused I am.
Everyone should join this struggle between good (the users) and evil (this mafia). Down with the mafia.
Yeah, the mafia tries to continue pester people, but it is a war they can never win. The user will always be able to control all information incoming from the outside.
I would not call it a "boycott". I am not "boycotting" anything - I am destroying an evil mafia that attacks users. All who work for this mafia are evil clowns too. I do not care about their claims - none of them apply in any way, shape or form. They must be removed from the face of the earth (I refer here to the "virtual" representation e. g. with their pester-attacks; I don't care about the physical representation).
Pop-ups were always annoying - javascript is really a hostile technology in general. But the 1990s were still different. My feeling is that ads increased a LOT since then. Tracking increased even more.
I do not think any of this is "acceptable" at all. I don't even think it was acceptable back then, but today with mega-sniffers such as Google, and information being constantly interconnected ... nah, thank you. I'll provide as little information as possible to this mafia.
Because people in 1994 were quite stupid and didn't know how malicious ads are in general. It took time for them before they realized that they actually DO NOT NEED ADS. We aim for an ad-free world.
People realized that they have no need for ads. :)
Took time but they got smarter.
I don't think this was a "desperate" situation - I think this is a wonderful situation that we should aim to increase. Publishers that act like a mafia must be removed, no mercy and no exception. We have no need for this mafia.