• 0

To use adblockers or not to use adblockers?


Ad Blockers  

45 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you use an ad blocker (or IE9s TPLs)?

    • Yes
    • No
    • Only on my main browser
    • On all of my browsers
    • On my non-main browsers.
  2. 2. Is it ethical to use an ad blocker

    • Yes
    • No
    • Yes, only if used on your main browser
      0
    • Of course it is; those blasted website operators and ad companies have annoyed me and made enough money off of me already -.-
    • Yes, if used only on non-main browsers
      0


Question

Hey!

I've started using some TPLs in IE10, and I really like reading Neowin without those annoying text ads :p I'd install ad blockers on all of my browsers, but (being a web developer myself) I don't entirely feel comfortable with the idea of taking away the major source of income for the sites that I use for free. I understand that my ad views represent a miniscule part of Neowin's (or any sites) overall income, but still, it's the whole 'what if everybody did that?' idea that's got me worried.

what do you guys think? do you use an adblocker, do you think it's ethical, and why?

Thanks ;)

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Adverts are not only intrusive but they pose a security risk and have a considerable impact upon browser performance. The best option is to install an ad-blocker and disable it for websites that you want to support.

  • Like 3
  • 0

Same I don't mind the Ad's I unblock Neowin from Time to time and click on a Few Ad's to help out.

But what I HATE...

Those Ad's with Sound.. I visited guildwars2guru the other day and had 2 or 3 playing all at the same time.

I Closed the Tab. and Installed Adblock+...

I also Emailed the Sites contact to let them know how bad my Esperance was. that to me was Unacceptable.

Btw I never received a Reply ..

I love Neowin. I normally Brose here with Ad's enabled.

  • 0

Wow, I'm the only person so far who thinks it's unethical to use an ad blocker? Disappointing that so many people think that way. I guess it's just another sign of the entitlement generation who feel entitled to take anything they want for free, and provide absolutely nothing in return.

  • 0

Wow, I'm the only person so far who thinks it's unethical to use an ad blocker? Disappointing that so many people think that way. I guess it's just another sign of the entitlement generation who feel entitled to take anything they want for free, and provide absolutely nothing in return.

No. Most people are sick of having ads pushed down our throat constantly.

Pay for a blu-ray/dvd. Go through 15 minutes of non-skippable ads. Not to mention many movies are clearly just giant advertisements for certain brands.

Pay for television. Cable isn't cheap nowadays and yet we usually have like 10 minutes of TV and 5 minutes of commercials and repeat.

Pay for services. Still get ads pushed down our throats. XBox Live comes to mind.

And etc.

  • 0

I use an ad blocker whenever I'm in Chrome, and disable for sites that I find valuable. I say it's unethical because you deprive the website owners of the revenue needed to operate the site. However, on sites that seemingly go out of there way to annoy you with ads, I don't feel bad about blocking because they annoy the hell out of me.

Bandwidth wasting video ads, ads that make noise, ones that cover up content and move when you scroll, are among the ones that get the hosting site not whitelisted in my ad blocker.

Plus as has been stated in this thread, ad blocking carries security benefits as well in the event an ad network gets compromised by malware

  • 0

I use AdBlocker and I'm not ashamed of using it. Why? I can tolerate jpeg/gif ads... I can't tolerate Flash/Videos Ads using my bandwidth and annoying me. I don't want you to take the right to use my bandwidth and my speakers/headphones without my consent.

Too many sites have exaggerated in the past... now they pay for their decision of pushing intrusive ads and wasting people's bandwidth without any embarassement

  • 0

Wow, I'm the only person so far who thinks it's unethical to use an ad blocker? Disappointing that so many people think that way. I guess it's just another sign of the entitlement generation who feel entitled to take anything they want for free, and provide absolutely nothing in return.

There's a fine line when it comes to ads. I was fine with them back in the day when they stayed out of your way. The moment they became "pushy" and "in your face" is the day I had enough. Not to mention they took up an excessive amount of space on certain pages, and for a while became an attack vector for malware. Pop ups, pop unders, flash based, text based, Intellitext (Worst offender, IMO), etc. You name it, I had enough.

Since I pay for Internet service - AKA *CONTENT*, and not advertising services, I had to install an adblocker to take back MY Internet. Of course I'm not above whitelisting sites that play nice with users, Like Neowin, however I still do block a good majority of the sites I go to.

  • 0

They are intrusive and a lot of time, buggy as hell and causes issues with the browser. Depends on the kind of ads. Also, a lot of times the link to an ad is down and the page will not load because of it . So I will go in and block the website (normally a site dishing out ads) and then the page will load.

  • 0

No, I don't think using adblocking is unethical. I'm sorry but so many web authors these days pay no attention to the impact their ads have on users. And they increase the loading time of most web pages significantly.

Unless a website specifically implies in it's TOS that you're required to view their ads to use the service then legally there is no wrongdoing if you block them. It's up to the provider of the content to find ways to make their business viable, not me as a user.

  • 0

Wow, I'm the only person so far who thinks it's unethical to use an ad blocker? Disappointing that so many people think that way. I guess it's just another sign of the entitlement generation who feel entitled to take anything they want for free, and provide absolutely nothing in return.

When it can infringe on my security, hell ya I will block whatever I want. I block the same things on my familys systems as well. Why? Because I am sick of cleaning up their PCs after they click on adverts that install malware.

  • Like 2
  • 0

I always greenlist neowin, because they had that guilt trip "don't like ads, pay for a subscription" text under any surpressed banner. that was a classy way of getting me to turn their ads back on, they aren't particularly irritating either so that helps.

A lot of sites I find unrecognisable when I first install a browser and haven't installed an ad filtering plugin, it's rather insane on some sites.

I'm in two minds about it.. but if more 'quality' websites inobstrusively pleaded with me to re-enable ads for their benefit, I would do so.

  • 0

I rarely ever click on ads. 15 years of using the internet makes you immune to most ads. In the rare occasion that I'm interested in whatever the ads are showing, sure, I'll click. But most ads are shady as hell.

That said, I never block ads. I do block the sh*t out of flash though.

  • 0

Same I don't mind the Ad's I unblock Neowin from Time to time and click on a Few Ad's to help out.

But what I HATE...

Those Ad's with Sound.. I visited guildwars2guru the other day and had 2 or 3 playing all at the same time.

I Closed the Tab. and Installed Adblock+...

I also Emailed the Sites contact to let them know how bad my Esperance was. that to me was Unacceptable.

Btw I never received a Reply ..

I love Neowin. I normally Brose here with Ad's enabled.

ain't that basically click fraud?

  • 0

Wow, I'm the only person so far who thinks it's unethical to use an ad blocker? Disappointing that so many people think that way. I guess it's just another sign of the entitlement generation who feel entitled to take anything they want for free, and provide absolutely nothing in return.

Yes, but do you read all ads on the page? Do you click on any of them? Do you purchase anything after having clicked on them?

If not, please alight from your confused ethical high horse.

  • 0

ain't that basically click fraud?

Well, I was only half serious when suggesting the monthly clicking spree -- I certainly couldn't be bothered to do so -- but I suppose it would be.

One could argue, though, that someone making a point of clicking on ten ads might be more likely to buy something than one person "genuinely" clicking on an ad because they think they might be interested.

To be honest, the whole model is rather flawed, the chances of an ad appearing of something you want to buy, at the time you are interested in buying it and from the shop you would be prepared to buy it from, are slim indeed. Of course, there are always impulse buys.

  • 0

looks like the sentiment here is the same - to use an adblocker :D

but I do think I'll take Shiranui's tip and go on a clicking spree once a month or so ;)

thanks again!

It's not sentiment, it's just plain logical

Should add, not only use an adblocker but a good host file too!

  • 0
Wow, I'm the only person so far who thinks it's unethical to use an ad blocker? Disappointing that so many people think that way. I guess it's just another sign of the entitlement generation who feel entitled to take anything they want for free, and provide absolutely nothing in return.

I don't see how it's unethical to block something that you'd never click on. The last time I checked most ad services - including Google's - operate on a per-click basis, not per-view. I never click on ads, so there is no revenue loss resulting from my actions. More importantly, ads are incredibly intrusive (some even malicious) - before I relied on ad-blocking I would regularly encounter ads that would automatically play audio or block up my entire screen and not allow me to close them (they weren't designed for the browser I was using). Perhaps I'd feel bad if I didn't receive spam emails, spam SMS and phonecalls from random companies intruding upon my free time. Perhaps I'd feel bad if ad-blockers hadn't become necessary because of pop-under and pop-over ads, which at times were virtually impossible to close. Ad-blockers were a direct response to the ad industry and websites abusing users for profit. I don't feel bad about fast-forwarding through adverts on TV either.

Ads aren't the only way to financially support a website. Many - like Neowin - have subscriber perks and merchandise; others allow donations; some are subscriber only. As long as it remains profitable to operate a website despite some users using ad-blockers the ecosystem remains intact. Don't forget that many would consider a website like Neowin to be morally questionable, as by getting your news here that deprives the original content producer of the advertising revenue for visiting their site (ignoring the minority who click through to the original source). Is that not morally dubious?

  • 0

I rarely see ads.

I am also on a low bandwidth connection, so why should i have my connection used to serve obtrusive things i dont want to see. Ive never clicked on ad online, and i was using the net long before the web when gopher was the primary protocol. So ive avoided clicking on ads for a loooong time.

I have several layers of adblocking.

1) Squid - with ad and malware block lists

2) Admuncher - legal version i might ad :)

3) Adblock plus in Waterfox, on the rare event an ad makes it through Admuncher

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • A different thing with Russia. When you say is it better, depends on things. It is better that we don't have the E.U making rules and laws that have nothing to do with them. Is the trading part better? No, that is really mucked up, but then we knew that was going to happen and we would have make agreements, like we do with other parts of the world. Freedom of movement is certainly better, but could be improved, we still need more control over our borders. do you live in the U.K?
    • So what am I quoting from them? I never listened to what Farage or his cronies said. I wanted the U.K to leave the E.u years before the referendum and it had nothing to do with Farage and his cronies. So what country do you live in? Did we work much better together? We were always at logger heads with the E.U because we disagreed with them so much. Maggie was always on at them. I would have thought the E.U was glad to get rid of us as we stopped the integration or made it a two tier. Now without us they can integrate more. I would not have voted out if it was just a trading block and we can still work together on somethings.
    • MPC-BE 1.9.0 by Razvan Serea Media Player Classic - BE is a free and open source audio and video player for Windows. Media Player Classic - BE is based on the original "Media Player Classic" project (Gabest) and "Media Player Classic Home Cinema" project (Casimir666), contains additional features and bug fixes. The BE mod (Black Edition Mod) is a skinned version of Media Player Classic Home Cinema, much better looking than the plain old MPC. MPC-BE 1.9.0 changelog: Splitters Fixed crashes in some situations. AudioSplitter Added support for the RF64 format. Fixed reading of channel layout for some WavPack files. Added support for ID3 tags for Wave64 files. Unknown Wave64 chunks are now ignored. AviSplitter Added support for 'y408' video. Improved support for 'HEVC' video. FLVSplitter Added support for VVC video. MP4Splitter Improved handling of corrupted files. MatroskaSplitter Expanded support for V_UNCOMPRESSED video codecs. Fixed support for frame rotation (ProjectionPoseRoll). Improved support for "V_MS/VFW/FOURCC / HEVC". MpcDvdVideoDecoder Fixed conversion to YUY2. Fixed display of menus for some DVD-Videos. RoQVideoDecoder Output in NV12 and YV12 formats is allowed. Full range is used. MPC Video Decoder RGB32 format will be output as a top-down bitmap by default. Added support for the "IID_MediaSideDataDOVIMetadataV2" interface. Removed support for the deprecated "IID_MediaSideDataDOVIMetadata" interface. Fixed retrieving the name of the video adapter when using NVDEC. Fixed crashes in some situations. MPC Video Converter Added support for AYUV video format. MpcAudioRenderer Improved input format validation. Optimized retrieval of supported formats for exclusive mode. Added the "Keep audio device active when paused" setting. Fixed crashes and freezes in various situations. Subtitles Added the ability to open the properties of an external subtitle renderer in the "Subtitles" settings panel. Fixed external subtitle connections for VSFilter. Fixed a crash when rendering PGS/SUP subtitles when using AVX2. YouTube Improved support for yt-dlp. The built-in YouTube parser is no longer used. Player The HTTP read strategy has been changed. If the playlist contains one entry, more key combinations can be used to control the player (jump through chapters, adjust volume). Improved support for reading ASX playlists. The translation of the MediaInfo report for Chinese, Korean and Japanese has been removed. Added blocking of 32-bit filter "PICVideo Lossless JPEG Decompressor" (pvljpg20.dll), because it crashes. Added blocking of the system filter "AVI Decompressor", which will eliminate the crash of VFW codecs. Fixed a rare crash when using the "/slave" key. Fixed a crash when getting a list of fonts for OSD. Added the ability to load an external audio file using hotkeys. Fixed opening a network path starting with \?\UNC. The "Determine duration when adding" playlist setting now works for YouTube video URLs. The "Online media services" settings panel has been redesigned. Added a "Merge files using FFmpeg" option to the file saving dialog. This option is activated when playing multiple streams obtained using yt-dlp. Added loading of local .dpl playlists ("DAUMPLAYLIST"). Fixed a hang when the user closes the player during the URL opening process. Various interface fixes. Installer Updated MPC Video Renderer 0.10.5. Updated MPC Script Source 0.2.17. Added MPC Image Source 0.3.6. Translations Updated Japanese translation (by tsubasanouta). Updated Chinese (Traditional) and Dutch translation (by beter). Updated Romanian translation (by Andrei Miloiu). Updated Hungarian translation (by mickey). Updated Turkish translation (by cmhrky). Updated German translation (by Klaus1189). Updated Chinese (Simplified) translation (by wushantao). Updated Italian translation (by mapi68). Updated Korean translation (by Hackjjang). Updated Chinese (Traditional) (by udfbe). Updated libraries dav1d 1.5.3-6-g04b69f9; ffmpeg n8.2-dev-1857-g4653e68aab; libpng git-v1.6.55-9-g7d52a8087; Little-CMS git-lcms2.18-26-gf739cda; MediaInfo git-v26.05-38-g702c9b7fd; ZenLib git-v0.4.41-91-g073f297; zlib 1.3.2. Download: MPC-BE 64-bit | Portable MPC-BE 64-bit | ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Download: MPC-BE 32-bit | Portable MPC-BE 32-bit Link: Media Player Classic - BE Home Page Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Apple reportedly looks to blacklisted Chinese memory chips as RAM prices climb by Karthik Mudaliar Image via Apple Apple is reportedly trying to get a clearance from the Trump administration to buy memory from ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) to get some relief from soaring DRAM prices. As per a report by the Financial Times, Apple approached the Commerce Department more than a month ago and also spoke to other officials and allies in Washington. For starters, CXMT is a company that's already been placed on the Pentagon's list of Chinese military companies. The Chinese company is the country's top DRAM maker. For Apple, the timing is certainly awkward but not surprising. Tim Cook had recently warned that Apple would have to raise prices because AI companies are buying up large amounts of memory for data centers, and just like that, Apple raised MacBook and iPad prices. Micron also recently revealed that customers have committed billions of dollars to secure memory supply years in advance, which shows us how aggressive securing infrastructure has become. This gives suppliers such as Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron more leverage, while pushing hardware makers to look for alternatives. CXMT is one of those alternatives, but not the simplest one. Apple has spent many years trying to diversify parts of its supply chain away from China, especially for final assembly, while still depending heavily on Chinese manufacturing and suppliers. Even domestic brands from China are moving towards CXMT and YMTC instead of relying on Samsung, Micron, and SK Hynix. For Apple, though, it would invite more scrutiny than local Chinese companies. For now, this is more like a lobbying effort rather than a confirmed supply deal. There's no official statement from either of the parties. What is clearer, though, is the pressure behind such a request. AI demand has certainly made hardware a bottleneck, and companies are trying everything they can to bring things back to normal, even if that means making politically sensitive choices. Source: Financial Times
    • I did test it a month or so back, but ... the results I expect to be on the first page are not there.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      486
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      220
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!