TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The right to use adblockers

338 点作者 jrepinc超过 1 年前

28 条评论

kleiba超过 1 年前
<i>&gt; the court nevertheless preserved Axel Springer’s right to exclude users with an activated adblocker from accessing its content</i><p>I actually think this is fair, and I say that as someone who has been using adblockers since the dawn of time and couldn&#x27;t imagine using a webbrowser without it.<p>I believe the court has decided absolutely sanely for one: it should be my choice as an internet user whether I want to be exposed ot ads or not. In my case: no way, Jose. And to those who make the argument that a lot of what the internet offers todays would be unsustainable without the ad revenue, I say that although you may think that you cannot live without this or that or the other on the internet, let me reassure you: you can. Everything on the internet is expendable. Trust me. Yes, even TikTok, son. Heck, most of what you&#x27;re in love with today wasn&#x27;t even there 10 years ago.<p>It may come in as a surprise to some but yes, you can have a life without the internet. And to be honest, I&#x27;d rather lose some conveniences if the alternative is this absolute insanity that is today&#x27;s web without an adblocker.<p>But if content providers do not want to give me their stuff unless I watch their ads, I think that&#x27;s fine. It&#x27;s your right to do that. Just don&#x27;t think that I am going to turn off the adblocker for you as a consequence. Much more likely, I&#x27;m just going to go somewhere else for my kick.
评论 #38727430 未加载
评论 #38727836 未加载
评论 #38727121 未加载
评论 #38727606 未加载
评论 #38730041 未加载
评论 #38728138 未加载
评论 #38728631 未加载
评论 #38728777 未加载
评论 #38729551 未加载
评论 #38729088 未加载
评论 #38732641 未加载
评论 #38732339 未加载
评论 #38734602 未加载
评论 #38736270 未加载
评论 #38728806 未加载
评论 #38727145 未加载
评论 #38729662 未加载
评论 #38728367 未加载
评论 #38727112 未加载
BLKNSLVR超过 1 年前
Part of the problem is the terminology &#x27;adblocker&#x27; is outdated and essentially incorrect.<p>Ads aren&#x27;t ads. They&#x27;re trackers, viruses, malware, scams. Even video ads on Youtube, whilst not vectors of viruses or malware, they&#x27;re advertising literal scams and YouTube are responding saying these ads are &#x27;within&#x27; policy guidelines.<p>As I&#x27;ve said a few times before (in various ways), browsing the internet without an &#x27;ad blocker&#x27; is like running Windows in the 90&#x27;s &#x2F; 00&#x27;s without anti-virus software when you&#x27;re a serial downloader of interesting programs &#x2F; executables (like I was); it&#x27;s negligent, you&#x27;re asking for trouble.<p>The advertising industry, Google, Facebook, etc. are hiding behind the terminology &quot;advertising&quot; because it makes it sound a lot more palatable than what the reality is, as I said above: tracking, malware, viruses, scams.<p>If it was just advertising, then I&#x27;d be much less rabidly agressive in my defense of blocking it: Annoying is a long way separated from Dangerous.<p>Advertising, as it has evolved on the Internet, is Dangerous.
评论 #38730126 未加载
评论 #38729255 未加载
评论 #38730136 未加载
评论 #38731659 未加载
Manuel_D超过 1 年前
My go-to analogy:<p>I subscribe to a magazine. It has ads. I pay my butler to cut out the ads. Is that illegal? Now I have a robot butler doing the exact same thing. Is that illegal?<p>The web server is serving you content. Your ad blocker is a robot butler cutting the ads out of the documents you&#x27;re receiving.
评论 #38727993 未加载
评论 #38727929 未加载
评论 #38752317 未加载
评论 #38728531 未加载
phailhaus超过 1 年前
At the end of the day, you have no &quot;right&quot; to a site&#x27;s content. You have the right to use an adblocker, and a site that depends on its revenue has the right to refuse to serve you.
评论 #38727995 未加载
评论 #38727734 未加载
评论 #38730205 未加载
cannedbeets超过 1 年前
As long as malvertising(1) exists, adblockers are basic security hygiene. You wouldn’t click a random link, so why would you allow an ad server to execute arbitrary code on your computer?<p>(1) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tomsguide.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;malvertising-what-it-is,news-19877.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tomsguide.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;malvertising-what-it-is,news-19...</a>
simion314超过 1 年前
I can&#x27;t find the original source, but there are many articles that claim that FBI recommends ad blockers, the ad networks made the internet unsafe so we need to setup ad blockers on our and our family computers.
评论 #38727309 未加载
Dwedit超过 1 年前
Right to use Adblockers also means the remote server has the right to force you to download and display the ads as a condition of getting the content.<p>Thus begins the arms race. The client can simulate all that happening, but ultimately not actually present the ads to the user (possibly including a blank screen with a timer for enforced video ads).<p>Then the server starts forcing client attestation to make sure their scripts run in a trusted environment.<p>Gets really messy really quick.
评论 #38729224 未加载
评论 #38728946 未加载
评论 #38729008 未加载
wdr1超过 1 年前
It&#x27;s worth noting that Eyeo makes money by being paid to <i>not</i> block ads. This article estimates it at 55M euro in 2020.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.startbase.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;adblock-plus-mutter-eyeo-waechst-stark&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.startbase.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;adblock-plus-mutter-eyeo-waec...</a><p>I can understand defining a standard for acceptable ads.<p>I can understand allowing ads that meet that standard.<p>What I struggle with is allowing ads that meet that standard AND require payment.
userbinator超过 1 年前
IMHO this is just a small part of a bigger struggle -- the right to use the browser of your choice (and thus one that also presents content the way you want), and by extension, the rest of your software and hardware environment.
lee超过 1 年前
I&#x27;m totally fine with this.<p>Content is paid with your eyeballs or with money. If you&#x27;re not willing to pay with your eyeballs, then you shouldn&#x27;t get the content. I think that&#x27;s fair.<p>In China where copyright laws aren&#x27;t enforced, there&#x27;s simply no economic incentive for producers to create content...let&#x27;s not go there.
more_corn超过 1 年前
Advertisers like to claim that their content is speech. While this might be true I’d classify advertising as attempted manipulation.<p>The advertiser only wins when they convince me to do something I wouldn’t have done otherwise. Often that thing is not in my best interest. Buying a new car is great for advertisers. It’s a terrible financial decision for me.<p>Advertisers succeed by manipulating consumer behavior in ways that harm the consumer. Protecting myself from harmful manipulation is not only my right but I’d be an idiot not to do it.<p>Companies that prevent me from protecting myself from manipulation earn my ire. Fighting against Adblock makes you a bad company, and people who do it are doing a bad thing. What do we call people who do bad things? I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
simonblack超过 1 年前
The way I see it, is that I have a choice whether to pay* for ads that are forced on me without my consent, or whether to block that advertising content.<p>The website owner has the choice to allow me to see his website ad-free, or to refuse my access to his website altogether.<p>That&#x27;s OK. I can survive if I don&#x27;t see his website at all. OTOH, if he blocks out too many of us, there won&#x27;t be sufficient eyes on his advertising anyway.<p>* pay for the ads I see? Yes. I have many times been in the situation where I had a small monthly quota of data such that my total data allowance <i>per day</i> was only 60 MB. It doesn&#x27;t take many 5 MB advertisements to complete use up my meagre daily data allowance.
macguyvermectin超过 1 年前
I think it should be obvious that I have a right to decide whether server-imposed JavaScript and CSS will run on my computer. If I only want HTML to render, that’s my prerogative. And if a site’s HTML isn’t useable without CSS and JS, then that site is defective and I’ll black hole its domain on local DNS.<p>If this breaks websites’ business models, that’s their problem, not mine. I don’t have bareback sex with strangers and I don’t visit random websites without uBlock Origin.
cdme超过 1 年前
If you don’t want me using an adblocker, you don’t want me using your site. I’m ok with that.<p>If your site fails because I’ve blocked your analytics suite, you have a poorly developed site.
matrix87超过 1 年前
&gt; According to Axel Springer, Eyeo’s business model constituted: ... a violation of freedom of the press<p>Wah, cry me a river. Some corporation making hundreds of millions of dollars thinks it has a right to run malware on people&#x27;s computers, just so the executives can line their pockets with more money. Maybe they should spend some of those millions and figure out a less stupid monetization strategy instead of trying to dream up a bunch of laws that suit them
Havoc超过 1 年前
This feels off to me. I feel entitled to use an adblocker, but I also feel the site should be entitled to make corresponding choice their side.<p>The reality is much of the web is ad funded, so some sort of ugly compromise is necessary. Allowing both sides to do as they please seems more fair than holding a gun to corporates head and telling them no.<p>That said I reckon news is an exception - it&#x27;s way too centralized and way to crucial to democracy to let all the big news orgs move as a unit. The way they all moved as a unit &amp; some lead the charge on paywalls knowingly taking a hit felt way too coordinated for my liking.
评论 #38728266 未加载
评论 #38728962 未加载
Terr_超过 1 年前
I&#x27;d also raise the issue if <i>liability</i>, for when that advertisement is a scam or a vehicle for malware Javascript or buffer-overflowing media.<p>If I have some kind of legal obligation to permit their system to <i>do stuff</i> on my computer, then surely they must have have some level of liability for what that stuff does or enables.
Justsignedup超过 1 年前
Unfortunately devs don&#x27;t get a vote, we&#x27;re just too much of a minority. Remember IE6? It took google literally firing all guns to de-throne it, and they did it because they injected a message with every google search to use chrome.<p>Unfortunately... i don&#x27;t know what we can do, even if the entire dev community gives google the finger.
评论 #38728072 未加载
评论 #38727231 未加载
mathgradthrow超过 1 年前
How you choose to render bits that are served to you is as fundamentally your right as whether you choose to leave your eyes open, or read text that has been put in front of you.<p>Moreover, your right to not be spied on for you browser configuration is the same as your right to not have your irises tracked. This isn&#x27;t even close.
rldjbpin超过 1 年前
i have a straightforward principle for using the Web and serving a part of it: both parties have the right to serve and consume the content as they choose to.<p>all this shaming by content owners who tend to continue pushing more intrusive ads is being rather unfair. at the same time, i don&#x27;t see any issues with them witholding access to content if we try to bypass their intended use.<p>today serving content at a reasonable level has never been this cheap. if you serve a 2MB webpage for 500 word piece, then it serves you right when you complain about how much it costs you to run it. using that argument to moral policing only goes so far.
alphazard超过 1 年前
This is ridiculous. We don&#x27;t need people pontificating about what &quot;rights&quot; exist when I chose to request content from someone else&#x27;s server.<p>We need better ad-blocking technologies. Let the arms race continue. Haven&#x27;t had to deal with ads for years now, as a happy Firefox + uBlock user.
评论 #38727333 未加载
评论 #38727446 未加载
评论 #38727454 未加载
评论 #38726989 未加载
heads超过 1 年前
It is difficult to take the complaint terribly seriously when part of their case against Adblock Plus is that it “violates the freedom of the press”.<p>Imagine if newspapers were free and supported by ads, but only had ads in the top 2” x 2” corner, on the outside edge of the paper. Imagine also that I sold a kind of square knife-press that you could use to stamp-cut the ads out all in one go. No one would seriously claim I was doing something wrong — just move the ads around to random places on each page!<p>Is it laziness that stops publishers from shipping targeted ads from their own servers, inlined in the content in a way that cannot be distinguished from article images or text?
评论 #38730449 未加载
mynameisnoone超过 1 年前
Unfortunately, there isn&#x27;t yet a corresponding human right to not being blocked for using an adblocker.
ssowonny超过 1 年前
Adblockers can be likened to piracy, similar to downloading movies from torrents.<p>It&#x27;s true that service providers should be mindful of ad usage to avoid alienating users. However, using services and bypassing ads equates to appropriating the service&#x27;s property.<p>If you disagree with a service&#x27;s monetization methods, it&#x27;s best not to use it. Don&#x27;t steal it.
评论 #38729342 未加载
评论 #38729090 未加载
评论 #38729006 未加载
评论 #38730123 未加载
samstave超过 1 年前
If I cannot use an ad-blocker, then I should be able to have a perfect measurment of what % of my bandwidth, for which I pay for, is consumed by ads, and then charge them a fee for resource utilization, convenience fee, fcc annoyance fee, corrupt-packet fee and dropped-packet waste of resource fee, and congestion fee.
评论 #38729011 未加载
评论 #38729058 未加载
Conscat超过 1 年前
All respect to Michael Larabel&#x27;s reporting itself, but opening a Phoronix article and seeing a dozen ad embeds which constitute most of the page weight is a frequent reminder to me that I live in heck.
评论 #38728704 未加载
评论 #38728965 未加载
teekert超过 1 年前
A browser is your car on the digital highway. Said car should have your best interest as priority #1. Not the highway itself, not some company. You.<p>Use Firefox people, before it is too late.
评论 #38727599 未加载
评论 #38727590 未加载
评论 #38727748 未加载
评论 #38728655 未加载
评论 #38728393 未加载
评论 #38726889 未加载
syndacks超过 1 年前
They have an advertisement begging for money at the top of the page.
评论 #38729727 未加载
评论 #38728222 未加载