• monobot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Maybe we should stop calling them adblockers.

    I am not blocking ads I am blocking spyware and malicious scripts. I wouldn’t have anything against well behaving ads without js.

    Also making it illegal is nit necessary, just don’t show me your content and exclude it from search results and we are good.

    • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      9 months ago

      I am selecting the files I wish to transfer and the ones I do not. It is my bandwidth. I also use reader mode as an accessibility feature.

      • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        On that note, I wish Firefox had a setting to always load sites in reader mode, when available. Ideally with the ability to set exceptions, though.

        • CaptObvious@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          This seems like a basic accessibility feature. I believe Safari can do it on a per-site basis, but all browsers should have the option as a global preference.

    • Enitoni@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      Meanwhile I just hate ads. I hate how deceptive and manipulative they are, and how the entire point is convincing people to Buy Product™ regardless of if it even works as advertised or will even be useful to the person. It always comes across as antisocial behavior to me, but maybe I’m way too radicalized from my hate of late stage capitalism and overconsumption.

      • hyorvenn@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        This, some feel the need to balance their use of adblocking by saying how it would be better if ads were less intrusive, less spying.

        We would be better without any ad at all.

      • anothermember@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I really think that’s a separate issue, which needs to be discussed as a completely separated issue. I agree ads by their nature are manipulative, they serve the website and the advertiser not the user. I think that once ads are non user-tracking then we can have a discussion about advertising ethics and deceptive advertising (online ads have always been terrible even before they were privacy invading) but you can’t have that discussion when it’s mixed in with privacy issues. Only once you take away the privacy issues then we can have the conversation about ad-pollution versus website revenue.

    • toastal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      I could tolerate well-behaved static image banners, but you know it would all be distracting videos at the least.

    • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      True. This is why I switched to uBlock origin, because it blocks so much more than ads: trackers, malware, and those stupid autoplaying videos. I really wish there was an “acceptable ad” option (per-site because some don’t deserve that but many do) like Adblock Plus though, where it lets through unobtrusive ads.

    • anothermember@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I really wish people would stop calling them adblockers too, they’re wide-spectrum content blockers, and they’re not blocking ads, they’re blocking malicious ad-networks which is necessary for user security. Given the prevalence of online spyware it should be a basic feature built in to all web browsers.

      It just gives spyware-promoting sites the ability to say “but you’re hurting our revenue” which is a completely separate issue.