Are ad blockers destroying the internet?
no but she is destroying my heart
who is that semen demen?
Same way piracy destroyed the film and music industry.
Are hospitals destroying the earth?
are anime destroying 3dpd?
A bit, or rather, changing it.
But really, it was ads that destroyed it in the first place, adblockers was just a logical response to how absurdly disgusting and intrusive ads were getting.
If they kept them as a still picture hidden in a corner that took you to a legit site related to the websites content and not some waggling cock with blinking lights telling you there are women to fuck in your area that leads to some malware infested shithole, or having a fucking 5 second add in front of every single god damn video on your website, adblockers would probably still be a fairly unused thing.
>>54008006
Why is hat a bad thing?
>>54008100
Between this and waifus, there is little room for women in 2016.
Of course not, fucktard.
>>54008131
Go die in a fire, queer.
>>54007742
Only destroying clickbait and e-celebs.
I don't mind ads, but a lot of sites make it a terrible experience. Ads make a lot of sites slow and unresponsive. Ads should not hamper your browsing.
The banners on 4chan are okay and I don't block them, but I have to block ads on almost every other site because it makes for a poor browsing experience.
>>54007742
No.
Relying on non-integrated ads is an unsustainable business model as it hinges on a social contract in an environment where none exists. You can't circumvent human nature.
Yes. Users fell like the have a right to free content when it comes to the web.
I think any non-e-commerce website are well within the right to advertisements to pay the bills.
They provide a service (that costs them) to the public. That deserves compensation from the users in some form.
Personally, I will only block adverts from e-commerce websites, because they get my money from physical products. Server costs etc, should be included in the mark-up.
>>54008286
>They provide a service (that costs them) to the public. That deserves compensation from the users in some form.
Bullshit.
I could make a stand on the side of the road with a billboard displaying news headlines but that wouldn't entitle me income from the people who see it.
However, if I was in a popular enough area I could rent space on the billboard to advertisers who would pay up front for the space.
Third party Internet ads are a scam. If you implement them you are basically admitting that your website is worthless and advertisers can take space on it for nothing.
>fags block ads on Internet.
>same fags buy clothing with company logos printed on them
>>54008604
Those aren't even comparable, fucktard.
>>54007742
m$ created thread
>>54007742
no. ad blockers are taking the internet back.
I don't know about the Internet, but I hope they're destroying shitty clickbait web journalism and review sites.
>>54008131
Die faggot weeb, you're not welcome here
>>54007742
Yes. And how. The end result is the pruning of shitty clickbait websites. They are trying to fight back by banning people with adblock but it only serves to lengthen the noose. Eventually less people will visit and the website dies.
>>54007742
Malware contaminated and script-heavy pop-over advertisements that cause people to switch to adblockers are what's destroying the internet. If you manage to get a tech-illiterate retard to actually look up and download an addon because even they have noticed something is terrible, then you know you've fucked up.
>>54009219
>>54008166
welcome to 4chan, enjoy your stay
>>54007742
Tatoo ads onto porn stars/models. Problem solved
>>54010170
Do you actually put that in your butt?
[spoiler]P-pics?
>>54010170
Nice shitpost, fucktard.
>>54007742
All ad-blockers do is remove an unwanted div from a page you're viewing. It's not blocking the TCP packet sent by the server, so it still reaches the browser. I'd argue that a ban on ad blockers is a law forcing you to display third party content on your privately owned monitor.
>>54009219
this is a literal weeb site & a figurative faggot site so idk about this
>>54010170
Do not bully the hamster,
>>54007742
No, people destroying internet. ADblock is just a tool
>>54007742
The "war" between ads and ad-blockers is what is killing the Internet.
As one gets clever, the other gets equally as aggressive.
Nah. Websites seem to be pretty comfortable with '(x) things' articles.
>>54007742
All the websites that depend on ad revenue I wouldn't mind seeing die tbqhwyrnf
the internet isn't 'dead', they just finally got around to banning everyone.
>wasting my bandwidth with ads
they should be paying me desu
>>54007985
>demen
You don't belong here. b is that way <<<
>>54008131
>cute one on the left is now a gross tranny
>>54008927
Those aites wont die. Because sponsored content will be the new advertisement model. So clickbait and review sites will thrive while indepedent sites will die.
>>54014215
They'll only get sponsored content if they retain viewership. Sponsors won't sponsor without a return.
The only way to make money off clickbait currently is advertising views/click throughs. You make people actually read the content to get a return and you're not going to get much back.
>>54009551
>less people will visit and the website dies.
You make that sound like a bad thing.
There will always be a website to fill a void.
Have you ever tried searching for song lyrics? Every single fucking site on page 1 of google has the exact same lyrics, complete with mistakes. Because the purpose of the site is not to provide lyrics, but to generate money either from ads, or by selling popularity profiles.
If they don't make money, they will shut down. But you will always have at least one lyrics site.
>>54007742
no, they are saving it from merchants.
When all ads are just images with links to whatever product it is, and don't try to dupe people, then they'll be okay
There's literally no reason to have Javascript involved with an ad
I have adblock disabled, except on blacklisted sites. If the website displays a few simple banners or text ads (like 4chan), I don't mind the adds, let them make some money. But as soon as it tries to cover the conten with an ad in any way, play sound, display a popup, or any other intrusive behaviour, it gets permanently blacklisted.
Most people who use ad blockers were never going to click on any ads anyway.
>>54016033
but its not about clicking
>>54008106
This.
Even before ad blockers became popular, browsers themselves were implementing their own popup blockers. Back in the 90s you could have your screen filled with literally hundreds of pop up ads.
>>54010170
I agree with you whole heartedly but Umaru is garbage
>>54007742
>Are ad blockers destroying the internet?
http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2016/04/more-big-name-sites-hit-by-rash-of-malicious-ads-that-attack-end-users/
>The malvertising is occurring through an advertisement platform which is actively used on the above mentioned websites. From the websites, external scripts are loaded which in turn redirect further towards the exploit kit.
>So far, none of the affected websites have said how the campaign managed to slip past defenses designed to detect malicious ads or explained what they're doing to prevent similar malvertising campaigns in the future.
It's not happening just because they piss people off. At least for me, that only accounts for about 40% of my reasoning for all adblocks.
>>54007742
no, they make the worst parts of the internet bearable to use
They're not destroying the internet but they are destroying good, free content.
>>54017685
What will we be ever doing without those clickbait news outlets.
Well, I fucking hope so.
>>54017700
Yeah, just ignore the other 99.9999% of content that is also hurting, like the website you are on right now.
>>54017541
This was one of my primary reasons for installing Adblock Plus back in 2006.
>>54017740
I would not be sad if 4chan died.
Sadly 4chan does not earn its money by advertising.
>>54017750
How does 4chan earn it's money?
Advertisers destroyed the internet and replaced with what we have now.
So yes, ad blockers will kill the internet as we know it.
Nothing of value will be lost.
>>54017750
http://www.4chan.org/faq
> It is our goal to provide the site free of charge to all users, and to support the site through advertising revenue [..]
>>54008106
/thread
Nobody cares about a 300x300px McBurger add next to a news site. But when you open a site there's first the full screen auto-play video add with a 2px close button, which opens 10 times because they divided the article in 10 parts on different pages so they can show more ads. Then there's the sites that open 20 pop-ups when you click anything, and that is before the 5 "click here to download" ads.
>>54017773
Oh...
Okay.
I guess if they are saying so themselves, it must be true.
They wouldn't like to me, right?
>>54007742
Only the corporate part.
>>54017781
Well, I do care. I block ads for just one reason - I don't want to see ads. I wouldn't mind if browser downloaded those ads and showed them in a hidden virtual environment to no one to trick advertisers.
>>54007742
is she an ad blocker? where can i get one? beg pardon, wat did you say again?
>>54017782
Ok guy didn't realize you were a tin foil nutcase
>>54010233
I want to believe.
>>54017799
Do you honestly think that those ads you see earn enough to run a site as big as 4chan?
>>54017798
>you will never block her ad
>>54009219
y not we let you hang out.
>>54017816
maybe if you stop posting furry porn in HD, then 4chins hosting wouldn't be so costly
>>54017847
I don't see how this is supposed to make your point any stronger.
>pop-up ads
>confirmed malware in ads
>JavaScript ads
>auto-play sounds/video
>5MB request is now 25MB
>"fuck Russian women now" ads when I send my dad a link
>fake download button ads
>incite clickbait articles
Yeah no decades of increasingly annoying ads ruined ads.
>>54017816
Look at this place, do you honestly think the shit posted here is worth anything, to anyone? They have millions of page views per day, and moot used to run servers out the back of his van to keep up.
>>54017904
Yes. Particularly, the stubborn decision to block animated PNG out of nowhere gives it away. Google is paying for servers.
They're fixing it
>>54008286
>free content
Only it's not free, user is already paying for the bandwidth. Might aswell optimize the use of your connection to not download a smiley face yelling SAY SOMETHING or a box telling me how this ugly son of a bitch is fucking super hot chicks and basically you're fucking stupid.
