 exocet_cmYou delete it, I'll find itPremium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
kudos:2
1 edit | reply to BF69
Re: Some things to consider said by BF69:said by fAcEtIOUs: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 |
|
 Doctor FourMy other vehicle is a TARDISPremium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX | 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)
|
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to exocet_cm
said by exocet_cm:said by BF69:said by fAcEtIOUs: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. |
|
rbedardPremium
join:2007-06-19
Scotts Valley, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
| 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_cmYou delete it, I'll find itPremium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
kudos:2 | 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 |
|
 h7
@charter.com | reply to exocet_cm
said by exocet_cm:said by BF69:said by fAcEtIOUs: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 |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | reply to exocet_cm
Shouldn't be that hard.
Maybe a little bit of Javascript that gives people who don't fetch that bit of content a nastygram. Or maybe a bit of beautifully formatted text under where the ad woulda been. |
|
|
|
 ZacPremium
join:2001-09-12
Hanna, AB
·TELUS
| I've been to some sites that do this, You block the ad, and upon loading, it warns you to not block them, and doesn't load the page. The only way to view the page is to unblock the ad, then refresh.
--
~There is no Normal or Abnormal... Just Diversity.
Member of Team Helix - Join Us? |
|
