• 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

    • Do you live in the U.K? Do any of the people here that are against the UK leaving the E.U, live in the U.K? If not then why are you bothered? If you do live here then it is a different thing . Brexit was a good idea, should have done it years before, it was done badly, but the idea was good. You are saying the same thing as remainers do, oh we did what Putin wanted, we listened to the lies and Farage. I hate Farage and never believed most of what he said, certainly did not believe the £350m a week for the NHS. But we did pay a lot of money to the E.U and yes some of it came back, but what is the point of paying it out for only some of it to come back? Get out of the E.U, no money to them and in theory we can use the money to do things in the country. I said in theory, but our governments are a total and complete waste of space. No matter what colour rosette they wear. You and others say it was a mistake and yet the two main parties in the U.K are not looking at rejoining the EU, I wonder why that is? I was not tricked by anyone. Makes no odds now, we are out and have been for 10 years, what we need is a decent government to run the country. All they do is shout at each other like a load of kids and seems to do nothing and make this country more into a police and nanny state. Getting more like China all the time.
    • 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q, 2TB T-Force G50, and 2TB WD My Passport SSDs drop to great prices by Fiza Ali Prime Day may be over, but there are still worthwhile storage deals available, including discounts on SSDs for shoppers who missed the event or are looking to upgrade their storage solution. Particularly, 2TB Western Digital My Passport, 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50, and 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD are selling at great prices with up to 23% off. The 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD with sequential read speeds of up to 5,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 4,500MB/s. The drive has an endurance rating of 1,300 TBW (terabytes written) and features a DRAM-less design. The company specifies a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 3 million hours. The drive includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader that helps dissipate heat without significantly increasing the drive's thickness. It also supports S.M.A.R.T. monitoring, allowing compatible software to monitor drive health and operating status. The SSD is rated for operating temperatures from 0°C to 70°C, with a storage temperature range of -40°C to 85°C. The drive is backed by a five-year limited warranty as well. 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 SSD: $269.99 (Amazon US) The TEAMGROUP MP44Q is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD that delivers sequential read speeds of up to 7,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 5,900MB/s. It uses 3D QLC NAND flash memory to provide 4TB of storage capacity for games, applications, media files, and other data. The drive has an endurance rating of 2,000 TBW and an MTBF of 1.6 million hours. The SSD features a DRAM-less design and supports TEAMGROUP's S.M.A.R.T. monitoring software, allowing users to monitor drive health, temperature, and remaining lifespan. For thermal management, the MP44Q also includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader. It is designed to operate at temperatures between 0°C and 70°C and can be stored at temperatures ranging from -40°C to 85°C. The SSD is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD: $478.99 (Amazon US) The 2TB WD My Passport SSD connects via a USB-C port using the USB 3.2 Gen 2 interface. It delivers sequential read speeds of up to 1,050MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 1,000MB/s through NVMe technology. In terms of security features, the drive includes password protection with 256-bit AES hardware encryption. The SSD is also designed to resist shock and vibration and is rated to withstand drops from heights of up to 6.5 feet. The recommended operating temperature range is 5°C to 35°C, while the non-operating temperature range is -20°C to 65°C. This drive is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 2TB Western Digital My Passport SSD: $279.99 (Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Yeah... The root of my comment, ostensibly, is how to spin the story via the actual technical merits of the solution! * Decentralized (aka federated) solution with built-in encrypted ephemeral message transport, * Transport via Relays (intermediary servers) with no message archival, * Second configurable pathway are actual email servers (if DNS records are programmed accordingly) via IMAP protocols carriage, * "Chat-over-Email" is the design pattern adopted; it can either leverage full-blown Email Server (must use the INBOX folder) to exchange all received messages/edits/reactions (so be weary of notifications overloads) [best practice is creating a separate email acct used explicitly for federated chat purposes!] or leverage its built-in Relay Server mechanism which actually resides on-device (by default but can be configured otherwise), * By virtue of be a decentralized/federated model, all other intermediary servers who may pass-along messages (while the recipient's final relay/device is inaccessible) cannot snoop on the messages due to the encrypted nature of contents. The intermediaries may, however, analyze the metadata due to the simple fact that routing mechanisms require hints for relay destinations. Unfortunately, whomever is posting about DeltaChat across socials are misleading with "zero metadata" claims -- especially when the Relays (according to their own technical documents) mandate the addition of chat-version metadata and other decorations in order to actually transport any message. -- Based on this summary, I'd prefer if they'd better dual-path message transport (email server add-in, federated relay engine) rather than patch-on email protocols to existing federated social media frameworks. They're frankensteining something rather than extending widely-deployed technology stacks.
    • Decentralized search result anonymization...
    • Russia invaded Crimea, so not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying that the E.U is like what the USSR was? What is wrong with wanting control over your own country? i bet Trump would not stand by and allow Canada to control the U.S.
  • 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
      493
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      225
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      148
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!