04-08-2012, 04:27 AM

Fair comment on ad blockers and revenue... but. In the case of ABP (only one I have used) it works like an on off switch. I can easily disable it for sites, such as this forum, and ads appear. If I go to a website where I have flashy, in your face ads, then I prefer to have them turned off. By default I prefer to surf with ads off and make my own choice when I activate them. I think some ads (and websites that pack them in by the bucketload) have got so annoying that ad blockers are not going to go away. Equally warning users that they will take the internet back to the stone age, , will probably not get rid of them. Middle ground is out there somewhere I guess. I think in the Firefox version of ABP it now allows certain types of ads, so I guess it is evolving. Anyway chalk up another victory to MacKeeper - it was the reason I put a blocker on in the first place - so I guess I can blame it for loss of revenue to multiple websites

04-08-2012, 04:56 AM

Last night I read a MakeUseOf article. It's a plead to turn off adblockers on their site, but it also offers good explanations on why the current adblocking method isn't perfect. The author of the article suggests, like you Pigstick, a middle ground, and he/she say it's already being worked on. The people who make the filters for AdBlock Plus are trying to find that middle ground, to only block flashy and other highly distracting ads.

Until that type of filtering is perfectly implemented, I suggest you turn ABP off by default, and only turn it on websites you've specifically found to have unbearable ads.

The article.

04-08-2012, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by yonyz

What I said is that the internet's content is free BECAUSE of ads, not that it is free OF ads. I know there's ads everywhere, and that's where services such as Instapaper, Readability and Read It Later come in. Also, you can hit the Print button for distraction-free reading.

I was addressing both your choice not to use one and your assertion that the internet is free because of ads. The internet is littered with them and many are obnoxious so regardless of whether or not that makes the internet "free", it's still problematic and detracts from the content.

Originally Posted by yonyz

The people who make the filters for AdBlock Plus are trying to find that middle ground, to only block flashy and other highly distracting ads.

That's a noble cause but my question here is simple: who gets to decide what's distracting? That's a slippery slope that I fear will solve nothing.

Originally Posted by yonyz

Until that type of filtering is perfectly implemented, I suggest you turn ABP off by default, and only turn it on websites you've specifically found to have unbearable ads.

This is where you and I diverge. I am ruthless with my adblocking and will continue to be that way. In fact, I've set up CSS injection to hide content on certain pages that adblockers don't catch to make for a more streamlined experience. Sure, ads are a nice way to implicitly support a website but I'm not going to subject myself to advertising for the sake of it.

04-08-2012, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by vansmith

It's surprisingly easy to figure out what OS the user is using as they browse the web. In fact, I just whipped up this quick example (here) in about ten minutes that detects your OS, browser and the version of the browser.

Haha. Classic vansmith.

04-08-2012, 01:49 PM

Hey, I have a reputation to keep up. I don't want the "program an example to make a point" title to go to someone else.

04-10-2012, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by yonyz

While I agree that the MacKeeper ads are absolutely everywhere, I wouldn't opt to use any sort of adblocker because the internet is free mostly (solely?) because of ads.

I don't understand.. the internet isn't free. You pay an Internet Service Provider to allow you to connect to the internet. The content that is shared is regulated by various laws of varying degree - some of it is free and some of it is not.

Your right to post what you want on the internet is the result of a lack of formal regulation and standard enforcement when the Internet itself was conceived - not the presence of ads.

What part of the internet is free, other than the opinions that people like me 'freely' give out?

04-11-2012, 04:23 PM

Sure, ads are a nice way to implicitly support a website but I'm not going to subject myself to advertising for the sake of it.

You might as well say this: money is a nice way to support the grocery store, but I am not going to subject myself to working 9 to 5 just for the sake of it. I want their food for free.
Viewing ads are what you 'pay' to use a website. If you find it too expensive, find a cheaper site. Don't steal from it.

I don't understand.. the internet isn't free. You pay an Internet Service Provider to allow you to connect to the internet. The content that is shared is regulated by various laws of varying degree - some of it is free and some of it is not.

You pay for the connection, not the content. OK, so let's say the content itself isn't free, let's say ads are the sort of money they use. I don't think that, morally speaking, you have the right to decide that you use their content but do not pay the 'price' (ads).

Sorry for not attaching nicknames to the quotes, I do not know how to do multi quotation well.

04-11-2012, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by yonyz

You might as well say this: money is a nice way to support the grocery store, but I am not going to subject myself to working 9 to 5 just for the sake of it. I want their food for free.
Viewing ads are what you 'pay' to use a website. If you find it too expensive, find a cheaper site. Don't steal from it.

That logic is deeply flawed. If content is made available for free, regardless of whether or not it's ad supported, it's still free. I'm not stealing anything if the website owner is making the content available to me at no cost. If I were to employ this logic in every day practice, I'd have to read every single ad so as to ensure that I'm not "stealing" anything from anyone. Now, if I was stealing an internet connection, I'd agree but since I'm not actually taking something that requires payment, I'm not stealing anything.

If ad blocking mechanisms truly were "stealing," there's no way that Google, a company that makes most of its money through advertising, would allow ad blockers to be distributed through the Chrome Web Store (more here). In fact, many of those extensions are targeted at Google products.

04-11-2012, 05:26 PM

I think Google allows it because it makes Chrome suitable for more users - those that won't give up on an ad-free experience. Also, only (and definitely not all), or mostly tech-savvy users use adblockers. I don't think we represent a big chunk of the people-who-use-the-web pie.

Also, when I say 'steal' when I talk about internet content, I do not talk about anything illegal. I talk about what's moral to my eyes. I think a website, most websites, offer you a simple package: content with some (or a lot of) ads. I either take the entire package (and THEN streamline it with the Print button or some reading bookmarklet/addon) or nothing at all.

When I take the highway, I see ads. It's part of the highway experience. If I can't stand the ads I should find an alternative route, but I won't remove those ads even if it's possible to remove them only from my view, and with a simple click of a button.

04-11-2012, 06:02 PM

This thread was originally posted to advise readers of the dangers of MacKeeeper not to generate into a slinging match on the ethics of advertising.

04-13-2012, 08:28 AM

Hi, everyone.

I'm a newbie here. I, too, keep getting popups about MacKeeper. Well, last week my Mac was acting funny. I went on a site {don't remember which one} and it praised MacKeeper to the nth degree. So I {apparently, foolishly} installed it.

Could someone please explain the dangers of it? And how do I remove it?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Sunshine

04-13-2012, 08:54 AM

LadyDunshine, if you did not run MacKeeper then I believe it is safe to say no 'danger' was posed to your mac.

As for uninstalling it, follow this: Uninstalling MacKeeper

Regardless of MacKeeper, if your mac is acting weird, run Onyx's entire suite of processes.

04-13-2012, 10:44 AM

A double edged sword is what we've got. But more than not, it is the owner of any website to decide whether or not they can afford to pay "X" amount of dollars per year for web hosting space in order to offer a "service". But you see, that right there is the catch. If you are offering a "service", then it is a business.

A business as such has the right to ASK their viewership for a membership fee. The Mac-Forums ASKS for a fee per year which if you know anything about the costs of maintaining such a service, is more than enough to cover said maintenance. Ads are supplemental and serve two purposes. One, they do bring in some revenue, especially if the user base is large enough. It's simply a matter of chance and ratios. Secondly, ads are an annoyance and might even sway some towards paying a yearly fee in order to get rid of them!

But please stop getting things twisted. The internet as you know it is NOT free, as others have already stated. You do pay for it. Everyone does. And it's a level playing field. If you can not afford to pay for server space, then don't think that you have the right to force ads on people in order to provide your oh-so special services!

Many internet services are subsidized by their share holders (Google, Facebook etc..) and originally had very sizeable financial backings in order to get started. Business is business and that is fine, but to say that it is stealing by blocking ads is ridiculous. If a website owner feels that they are providing a legit service that others can not do without, then they can absolutely ask for a monthly or yearly membership fee.

The website owner can also restrict the type of access that a person has to their site if they're not a "member". The Mac-Forums does this, and many other sites do this as well. It's called the perks of membership, and if done right, can be a LOT more effective than trying to generate revenue from ads. But then, the site has to have content with real value. This can not be said about most of the sites which kill you with ads.

Doug