>>40279
Have a real newslink or 3, and regards from the /news/team to the /g/entoomen:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/ad-blocker-blocking-websites-might-be-violating-european-privacy-laws

http://news.softpedia.com/news/blocking-ad-blockers-may-be-illegal-in-the-eu-thanks-to-the-cookie-law-503359.shtml

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/23/anti_ad_blockers_face_legal_challenges/

Forbes.com is the site that sticks out in my head as the worst offender when it comes to making their site unable for people with adblocking enabled.

>>40327
hey there. I'm also /news/, i actually noticed on this dutch site first: http://tweakers.net/nieuws/110645/detectie-van-adblockers-volgens-europese-commissie-illegaal.html

Top comment: that site also complains about you blocking ads. lel.

I wonder if this'll bring about actual changes. Took a while for the whole cookies thing to take off (which is based off the same legal shit)

>>40279
It's a small fragment of a diamond in the rough. This doesn't make up for the rapefugees or loss of sovereignty.

Why is every shitty law the EU makes designed to prevent businesses from making a profit?

>>40352
Making a profit shouldn't be the most important thing in the world.

>>40353
I suppose you think servers are free.

>>40354
It depends on your definition of "Server". For instance, I have run a domain from my own home on an old PC running Gentoo and Apache "for free" through my cable modem for the last 11 years. Granted I'm paying my ISP for my broadband account but I'm not paying anything additional on top of what everyone else is paying just to host a live "server" in my house.

How much above the cost of doing business is too much?

You are aware that business interests did not create the internet, right? They don't own it no matter how much they say they do. It was supposed to be mankind's greatest learning tool. It was never intended for profit making.

>>40360
For some reason you think that running a server out of some retired desktops is enough to power an entire news outlet who's very existence relies on the ability to make money in the digital age. Who is going to pay the journalists ? Who is going to host the servers ?

Cern gave up any right to how the Internet should be ages ago.
Everything that exists on the Internet is a buisness. So if you're going to say something like, the Internet is a glorious place where we can share knowledge, that no longer applies.
Google and other search engines set the rules of the Internet. They may not own it, but they control it. Google is a business therefore the Internet is a business.

>>40369
The issue is the busniess model. Instead of being lazy by annoying or blocking customers that use ad blockers. Innovate and find a new way for income. Maybe reward those that don't use blockers?

>>40374
That's like rewarding someone for not robbing the local gas station this week.

>>40379
Fuck off dude. Think if you were walking down the street or driving down the road and you could block out 'seeing billboards'. Would you? Are you stealing from the companies that put up the billboards?

Internet websites have no rights to what you view what is on the page. You came for the information, not the profiteering of the information put there. Why the hell do you think no one reads magazines anymore? Their bullshit ads on half of the pages are worthless to the reader. Well, to the non-consumer.


Let me pose this question; just because we use an entities service, does it mean they should have total control of the visit? Google should be able to track your visits? Searches? Interest? And then sell this information?

>>40354
I suppose you can't sell a decent product/service.
Pirates exist for a reason and by cutting out crap from the product they do a service for the customer and provide a free product.

>>40369
You seem to think that businesses have a right to exist: that just because you bought a domain name and threw some content up on it, that you deserve to be reimbursed enough to cover operating costs and have some profit left over. This is false. If your business model is "Hope people look at advertisements" and people don't want to look at advertisements, your business model sucks. Find something else to do.

Yes, this means a lot of companies are probably going to wake up with no revenue model and fail. Tough shit. I don't really care which celebrities are fucking this week anyway. Maybe if there were some real investigative journalists around I would be inclined to give them money.

You also seem to think that the internet doesn't work without centralized servers that cost millions of dollars and necessarily have to be overseen by huge corporations. For a history lesson, look up NNTP, and think to yourself how a globe-spanning community somehow managed (or manages, if you feel like it) to work just fine without any centralized servers, ads, or search engines. Hell, look at Wikipedia's budget and look at the internet presence they maintain with it.

>>40389
>Think if you were walking down the street or driving down the road and you could block out 'seeing billboards'. Would you?
Why would I not be keeping my eyes on the rode to read an add?

>Are you stealing from the companies that put up the billboards?
You are if you are getting someone to take them down so you don't see them.

>Internet websites have no rights to what you view what is on the page.
It's their page.

>Why the hell do you think no one reads magazines anymore? Their bullshit ads on half of the pages are worthless to the reader.
That's not the reason print media is dying you moron.

>Let me pose this question; just because we use an entities service, does it mean they should have total control of the visit?
Uh, yes? Isn't that the point of providing a service?

Kid, you are sounding like an entitled brat who thinks that anything on the internet should be free by default.

>>40400
Are perchance autistic ?

First off. How do news outlets make money if they provide free content to people.
How does Facebook make money if they provide free content to people.
How did Google make money before they expanded into other fields.

And your definition of news is the Gosip. How pathetic are you ? You know some people devote their lives to writing meaningful news articles covering real issues ?

And wow, that last paragraph was horrible. No logic at all. I'm not even going to go into that.

>>40410
>internet should be free by default.
All information should be free by default, not just internet and not just news.

>>40410
After that first green text reply I really can't take this you seriously. You immediately threw your credibility. why would you do that?

>>40413
Ok, then how do they make money?

The third-party advertising model is bad for consumers and bad for the internet in general. It's a cliche but generally true statement that if you're not paying for it, you're the product. When a website supports itself with third party ads, the relationship changes from that of a business selling a product/service to a customer into one in which businesses sell customers to other businesses. This is obviously bad for consumers as it prioritizes what is good for the advertiser over what is good for the customer. Example: sites that split content that could easily fit on one page into like a five page slideshow so that they can show more ads.

In addition, the broken nature of the metrics of the third party advertising model, often requiring that an ad merely be loaded by a browser in oder to generate revenue, has led to a proliferation of quantity of content over quality content. Those who complain most bitterly about adblock know that they would never survive if they had to compete on the merit of their content.

>>40435
By killing the Batman.

>>40435
If they are in business to make money instead of providing a service to mankind then they shouldn't be doing it in the first place.

>mfw people will argue on the Internet in support of advertisements

If I request some data from you and you send it to me, I have the right to do whatever I want with it at that point. I can run whatever programs I want on my own machines. If your business model relies on me to run programs that interpret and render HTML in a way that I don't enjoy, your business model is pants on head retarded, and that is exclusively your own problem.

That said, I don't see why people shouldn't be able to try to use dumb business models. As long as they don't try to get ad blockers outlawed, I think they should be able to run whatever they want on their own servers. I'm perfectly content not to use their stupid websites. I blacklisted connections to Forbes a long time ago and nothing of value was lost.

>>40446
Listen to this faggot.

>>40412
>perchance
>calling others autistic

>>40435
>everything that exists has to make money
???

>>40412
You can't even spell or use correct grammar, and you're calling other people autistic.

>>40435
Jew detected

>>40446
So you're saying is that the people who spend their time reporting the news shouldn't be making any money?
Do you not know how money works?
You kind of need a constant inflow of it to do stuff like eat.

>>40492
>>40512
Sevres, electricity, and webpage maintenance aren't free.
The whole point of ads is to cover that cost.

>>40517
>You kind of need a constant inflow of it to do stuff like eat.
How much above that is too much?

>>40374
It's not so simple. News is dying and lacking a good way for independent news outlets to make money is why we see all this clickbait shit now.
If you want news media that isn't state-run, it's subscriptions, or advertising. There are currently no other options.

If you have some innovative solution, there are plenty of places that would leap at the opportunity. People have been trying to find one for about 15 years...

>>40389
>Internet websites have no rights to what you view what is on the page. You came for the information, not the profiteering of the information put there.
It's their page, you fucking child. What right do you have to what they produced?