• TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a distinction that some defenders miss. A lot of people who use ad-blockers would be fine with ads if they were restrained and not too obtrusive. But the amount and frequency of ads only seem to increase. Something that would be difficult to justify, because time does not suffer inflation.

    We went from 1 skippable 5 second ad per video to multiple ads every 10 minutes or so, sometimes even unskippable 15+ second ads or even more ads in a row. When is it going to be enough? Are we supposed to take them on their word that this is necessary, simply assuming that they need it because they don’t even share financial numbers? Is our only other option to pay up, once again, the amount that they decided is a fair compensation and also keep increasing?

    Seems that at the very least some way for the users to negotiate what they believe is fair is lacking in this matter. On the lack of that, no wonder some people just decide they refuse to be squeezed forever.

    • online@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      And let’s be honest about who this is paying: Alphabet’s 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

      Adversarial tech, like adblockers, is good. We should use it. If people want users to not want to use it, they should change the product so that we don’t want to use it.

      It’s not illegal for me to use an ad blocker and it should never become illegal.