BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Some things to consider
said by TKJunkMail  :The opt-out cookie is not a google.com cookie, it is a doubleclick.net cookie. I allow Google cookies on my systems but not doubleclick.net cookies. So the Google preferred opt-out method wouldn't work. I could use the Firefox add-on mentioned, but I have a better way. I use the Firefox add-on "Adblock Plus" along with a subscribed filter lists that blocks all Google ads along with Google analytics tracking cookies at thousands of sites. I use Easylist and EasyPrivacy at » easylist.adblockplus.org/Of course Adblock Plus blocks more than Google ads. It blocks ads from all vendors on just about every site I ever visited. So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit.
Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. |
|
exocet_cm
In memory of dadkins
Premium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
clubs:  
 ·Cox HSI
·Suddenlink
 ·Cingular Wireless
 ·AT&T Southeast
·Charter Pipeline
1 edit |  said by BF69 :said by TKJunkMail :The opt-out cookie is not a google.com cookie, it is a doubleclick.net cookie. I allow Google cookies on my systems but not doubleclick.net cookies. So the Google preferred opt-out method wouldn't work. I could use the Firefox add-on mentioned, but I have a better way. I use the Firefox add-on "Adblock Plus" along with a subscribed filter lists that blocks all Google ads along with Google analytics tracking cookies at thousands of sites. I use Easylist and EasyPrivacy at » easylist.adblockplus.org/Of course Adblock Plus blocks more than Google ads. It blocks ads from all vendors on just about every site I ever visited. So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. I have every right to block whatever content I do not want to be exposed to, including advertisements. Nuff said 
--
"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons..." - T.S Eliot
Check Out the Tech Bench »johndball.blaize.net/index.php/tech-bench/
Ma blog: »www.johndball.com |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to BF69
said by BF69 :So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically **** them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have a site and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I generate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. Whats the difference? I never clicked on ads before I used Adblock. And when I use IE or Chrome while testing those browsers out I never click on ads then either. So, unless I am wrong about how web sites get paid for ads(I have to click on one for you to get money), you weren't getting any money from me anyway. All I have done is remove the annoyance from my monitor.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
anony101
@comcast.net
 from:
TKJunkMail
| reply to BF69
So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? The ads only generate revenue if you click on them so by visiting a web page and not clicking on the ads one could say you fuck them over as well. |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :Whats the difference? I never clicked on ads before I used Adblock. And when I use IE or Chrome while testing those browsers out I never click on ads then either. So, unless I am wrong about how web sites get paid for ads(I have to click on one for you to get money), you weren't getting any money from me anyway. All I have done is remove the annoyance from my monitor. Agreed. Unless the ads are embedded into the site itself, I don't care about ads either. I don't click on them (never actually), I mean if I want to buy something, then I go search for it. The "impulse" buying, I'll leave that to others.
Adblock and the like are a choice, not a feature that can't be turned off. If all browsers came with Adblock on by default, then yes I can see a more valid argument about advertising revenue. But those that use this type of extension for their browser never intended to click the ads in the first place so it's no different than ignoring them.
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data |
|
Doctor Four
My other vehicle is a TARDIS
Premium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to exocet_cm
said by exocet_cm :I have every right to block whatever content I do not want to be exposed to, including advertisements. Nuff said This is something that every marketdroid in the advertising industry doesn't seem to get.
And I see nothing wrong with blocking them when ad networks are routinely hijacked to redirect site visitors to rogue security software such as Antivirus 2009.
As for Google/Doubleclick, not only do I use Adblock Plus, but TrackMeNot.
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
|
|
CtrlAltDel
WORSE. THAN. CARTER.
Arbitrary Text
join:2001-12-30
Backyard
 ·1and1
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :said by TKJunkMail :Of course Adblock Plus blocks more than Google ads. It blocks ads from all vendors on just about every site I ever visited. So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. I thought everybody blocked ads. I, too, use adblock and never see ads when I use FireFox. When I used to see them I never clicked them. What's the difference between not seeing the ads and not clicking them? None. |
|
CCTVTech
Premium
join:2003-04-23
Phoenix, AZ
clubs: | I only block the annoying flash ads. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to CtrlAltDel
said by CtrlAltDel :said by BF69 :said by TKJunkMail :Of course Adblock Plus blocks more than Google ads. It blocks ads from all vendors on just about every site I ever visited. So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. I thought everybody blocked ads. I, too, use adblock and never see ads when I use FireFox. When I used to see them I never clicked them. What's the difference between not seeing the ads and not clicking them? None. So if you never intend on buying a movie on DVD just download it from a torrent right? What's the differnce? |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to exocet_cm
said by exocet_cm :said by BF69 :said by TKJunkMail :The opt-out cookie is not a google.com cookie, it is a doubleclick.net cookie. I allow Google cookies on my systems but not doubleclick.net cookies. So the Google preferred opt-out method wouldn't work. I could use the Firefox add-on mentioned, but I have a better way. I use the Firefox add-on "Adblock Plus" along with a subscribed filter lists that blocks all Google ads along with Google analytics tracking cookies at thousands of sites. I use Easylist and EasyPrivacy at » easylist.adblockplus.org/Of course Adblock Plus blocks more than Google ads. It blocks ads from all vendors on just about every site I ever visited. So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. I have every right to block whatever content I do not want to be exposed to, including advertisements. Nuff said Um if it's MY site it's I that dictate the rules not you. if you don't like them you are free not to come back. An din fact if you are just going to be a freeloading leech I'd rather not have you back. I guess you think website cost nothing to run and are created by magical fairies. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :said by BF69 :So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically **** them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have a site and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I generate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. Whats the difference? I never clicked on ads before I used Adblock. And when I use IE or Chrome while testing those browsers out I never click on ads then either. So, unless I am wrong about how web sites get paid for ads(I have to click on one for you to get money), you weren't getting any money from me anyway. All I have done is remove the annoyance from my monitor. Considering you almost ALWAYS agree with me on copyright and how wrong it is to download stuff I am shocked at your attidude at this. What's the differnce between you blocking ads and someone using the excuse that they never had the intention of paying for the content anyways so it's ok to download it. Please explain the differnce. |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :So if you never intend on buying a movie on DVD just download it from a torrent right? What's the differnce? Your reasoning isn't reasoning.
--
goodbye dad |
|
CtrlAltDel
WORSE. THAN. CARTER.
Arbitrary Text
join:2001-12-30
Backyard
·1and1
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :So if you never intend on buying a movie on DVD just download it from a torrent right? What's the differnce? What's a torrent?
I go to a theater and pay cash to see movies or I rent them from NetFlix.
The differnce is that you're comparing apples and watermelons.
There is no differnce in blocking the ads, covering up the part of screen where the ads appear with my hand, or just not clicking on them. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by CtrlAltDel :What's a torrent? You're joking right?
There is no differnce in blocking the ads, covering up the part of screen where the ads appear with my hand, or just not clicking on them.
once again using YOUR logic if I never intend on paying for the content I can illegally download it from the internet. I'm not costing the movie studio any money because I never intended on paying for it anyways. right? So it's ok. |
|
rbedard
Premium
join:2007-06-19
Scotts Valley, CA
·SONIC.NET
| reply to BF69
I do not believe that you have a reasonable expectation of controlling access to your site unless you control access to it.
If you PUBLISH (to the general public), you have no reasonable expectation that people will download or view all of the content of any particular page.
If your site depends on ad revenue, you need to have enforceable policies in place to get people to sign up to see the ads.
Otherwise, the visitor decides what they view or do not view. |
|
exocet_cm
In memory of dadkins
Premium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
clubs:
·Cox HSI
·Suddenlink
·Cingular Wireless
·AT&T Southeast
·Charter Pipeline
|  reply to BF69
quote:
Um if it's MY site it's I that dictate the rules not you.
WTF? If I block ads from YOUR website then what? Who is gonna stop me? You and what digital army?
Resistance is futile, mwuahahahahahaha
--
"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons..." - T.S Eliot
Check Out the Tech Bench »johndball.blaize.net/index.php/tech-bench/
Ma blog: »www.johndball.com |
|
borked
Cheese With That Whine?
Premium
join:2003-08-10
Kalamazoo, MI
| reply to anony101
said by anony101 :So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? The ads only generate revenue if you click on them so by visiting a web page and not clicking on the ads one could say you fuck them over as well. That is not completely true. There are many ads that are displayed on a timed basis. You may have a company that "sponsors" an article or section of a web site on a weekly/monthly basis. As a reader I would think that you would want to know who is kind enough to support and make that content available.
--
It is much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about the problem.
Malcolm Forbes (1919-1990) |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to BF69
So if I walk out of the TV room to take a piss during commercials I am stealing? How about fast forwarding through them? Is that a felony in your world?
Unbelievable.
Ads on web pages are the functional equivalent of TV commercials. There is no guarantee anyone will see any of them and any content you publish to the public is not conditioned on acceptance of the ads. |
|
h7
@charter.com
| reply to exocet_cm
said by exocet_cm :said by BF69 :said by TKJunkMail :The opt-out cookie is not a google.com cookie, it is a doubleclick.net cookie. I allow Google cookies on my systems but not doubleclick.net cookies. So the Google preferred opt-out method wouldn't work. I could use the Firefox add-on mentioned, but I have a better way. I use the Firefox add-on "Adblock Plus" along with a subscribed filter lists that blocks all Google ads along with Google analytics tracking cookies at thousands of sites. I use Easylist and EasyPrivacy at » easylist.adblockplus.org/Of course Adblock Plus blocks more than Google ads. It blocks ads from all vendors on just about every site I ever visited. So basically sites that provide you information and content for FREE you basically fuck them over? Yes ads can be annoying but fact is without a revenue stream the only other option for site to generate revenue is to charge subscriptions. I'd rather not have to pay for every site I want to visit. Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything. I mean legally you can, but the "I wish to not be an asshole" law you can't. I have every right to block whatever content I do not want to be exposed to, including advertisements. Nuff said I whole-heartedly agree. It's bs ideas that are permeating the masses like numb-skull mentioned ("Sorry but if I have asite and i'm letting you visit my site for FREE and ad are the way I genrate revenue you don't really have a right to block anything") that still have prevented any serious laws being passed that make ALL internet spying and un-willful data collection, retention, distribution, and selling illegal. Don't tell me it's about freedom of speech either, anyone, because everyone also has the freedom FROM speech and to not have others constantly spying on them, whether they be a person or a gigantic multinational corporation that is the perp, it does not matter and is the same thing. Probably the largest travesty that has happened on the internet and especially recently on the internet is people giving up all their rights of privacy just because they get swindled into believing it's for a "greater good". This is total and utter bs and the more obnoxious google and its supporters become in cramming these ideas down my throat, the more adamant I am in fighting against these ideas, at least from everything I use. The truly sad thing is those who are the first to defend google and its enterprises are also the first to "accidentally" get all sorts of viruses and such on their computers and everyone they know all of a sudden are sending out spam-mail from something they downloaded.. and they still don't even know about it. Meanwhile, it's no big thing, since they only knew the internet existed since 2000 (just fyi for anyone that doesn't know, it has been around since at least 1969 if you don't count arparnet). So anyway, only boneheads support anything that infringes a human beings right of privacy. They would be the first to jump in line to sign up for a doublespeak class or a second helping of soylent green. How pathetic.
h#7 |
|
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to TKJunkMail
Well if you spent sometime learning about ads you'd learn that most ads now are CPM based and not click based. They go by views, so it doesn't matter if you click the ad or not. So yes you aren't helping the sites you visit one bit. Only Google ad's are really click based the hundred other ad networks aren't.
--
My Anime Site - AnimeCrazy.net |
|
