• SapphironZA@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    10 months ago

    The main problem is 3rd party advertising. If the New York Times ran ads on their website like they did with the physical newspaper, we would not have this problem.

    Publishers need to take direct responsibility for every ad on their platform.

  • ConstipatedWatson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    10 months ago

    I dislike the fact that “ads” can also include crapware being injected into my computer (viruses, tracking cookies, mysterious scripts, etc).

    • dan1101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      And there are so many scam ads that look like UI buttons and such. I can see why people get fooled sometimes. Those sort of ads should automatically be rejected by af networks and the sites that host them. But $$$

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    10 months ago

    Many parts of the Internet has become functionally unusable without one. And given online advertising’s history as a vector for malware, as blockers are just the sensible choice.

  • Schwim Dandy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t think I could use the internet if I didn’t have an adblocker. Ads genuinely anger me. I think it’s just from the early days with pop-overs and unders, blinking, non-collapsible and the like holding content hostage. Intrusive or not, I’ll do everything I can to not see an ad.

  • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    10 months ago

    The internet is unusable without an adblocker… I recommend uBlock Origin and Pihole.

    • Notorious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      uBlock Origin at a minimum. But I would suggest a privacy focused browser. Librewolf, Mulvad or even Brave. Browsers leak so much information about you it is easy for sites to fingerprint and track you even with an ad blocker.

      https://privacytests.org/

      I know Librewolf is working on their DNS leakage (last section on privacytests.org), but they also allow you to select a privacy focused DNS server which is nice when you’re not on a network you own, so you can’t run PiHole.

  • ximtor@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    10 months ago

    Does anyone ever actually click on an ad? Like “hey thats cool I wanna check it out/buy it right here right now”?

    I have adblockers active everywhere and only disable then somtimes for specific sites that really don’t work otherwise, but even if the unlikely case would come up that something is interesting I would just look it up separately? Mostly I just turn a blind eye on them anyway, but just wondering, some people gotta really click/buy from these ads? It just seems so surreal to me…

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The only obvious ad I’ve ever clicked on was for a “free” IQ test. I figured I’d never done one cause they’re fake, but I had time to kill, so I clicked through. After 20 mins or so answering questions, it ended on a transaction page. The only way to see your “results” was by paying $20. I obviously didn’t pay, and instead tried to report the ad, only to discover that Google Ads has zero mechanism to even report scams to Google. After some research, it turned out that this blatant bait and switch scam had been operating via Google Ads for like 5 or 7 years. Google doesn’t give a fuck if scammers use it’s ad tech to scam your grandma or inject your system with malware, as long as they get paid for the privilege.

      I’ve always used an ad blocker, but the whole experience reinforced how anti-consumer and pro-criminal surveillance capitalism is. Permanent absolute ad block — without exceptions — is how everyone should operate, because none of these companies deserve any trust whatsoever. Even if you trust the site you’re visiting, you can’t trust any ad company they utilize.

      • nehal3m@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        The only obvious ad I’ve ever clicked on was for a “free” IQ test. I figured I’d never done one cause they’re fake, but I had time to kill, so I clicked through.

        That click should have lead you to a page that says ‘you failed’. 😂

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        If you’re walking around somewhere and you see a person or people offering a “free personality test,” do not take them up on their offer. They’re Scientologists. They once refused to let my mother leave back in the 70s until she said she would start screaming “rape.”

    • TragicNotCute@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 months ago

      People definitely do. CTR (click through rate) is generally pretty low, even before the majority of Americans were using ad blocks. But it’s not 0

    • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      My wife does. But she’s a sucker for “a good deal”

      I dont ever click on them myself, but if I start searching for something I need/want, and I see a brand I’m familiar with thru advertising, I’m more likely to explore their product, at least. Simply just because, “of I’ve heard of this before”

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        Brand recognition is one of the key goals for running ads, it works.

      • ximtor@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        But these are never real deals are they? At least I saw maaaaaaany bullshit fake deals, cant remember anything legit ever…

        I also found my mum buying crap of instagram a while ago, but i kinda got to her to be a bit more mindful what she clicks on.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Not only did my late father-in-law click on ads, he also clicked on spam emails. Yes, his computer was super slow and I regularly had to clean off the malware.

    • ZephrC@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I know ad rates and metrics are heavily based around click through, but does it even actually matter? I mean, TV ads are big money expensive, and nobody has ever clicked on those. I guess if you’re advertising a shitty mobile game or something then it matters, but does McDonalds or whatever even want you to buy a hamburger before you watch a YouTube video? That doesn’t really make a lot of sense.

    • guy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I have ad blockers everywhere, except native mobile apps. I’ve clicked on an Instagram ad for shirts. I bought the shirts. People keep complimenting me on the shirts. No regrets there

      • ximtor@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I guess that sounds reasonable. I sometimes miss seeing some of the cool stuff on instagram

    • Brown5500@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Sometimes the sponsored links at the top of a Google search are exactly what I was looking for. I just need to quickly disable AdAway so that I can follow the link.

  • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    10 months ago

    If the ads are unobtrusive and interesting, and not clearly based on harvested personal data, I wouldn’t mind.

    Unfoorrrtunately…

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Exactly.

      I was excited for Brave when they talked about service privacy-friendly ads and sharing revenue with sites. That obviously didn’t happen, but I think it is a good idea in general.

      I don’t mind privacy-respecting ads like sponsorships and whatnot in videos, but I absolutely cannot stand the data-harvesting ads used almost everywhere, as well as ads in services I’ve paid for.

  • daddy32@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ads are just pure negative. There was even one study that calculated this as a direct financial negative, although unfortunately in narrow circumstances: it was calculated that for mobile users in the US, paying for the data transferred to display the ad was more expensive than what the site owner got paid for including it on his site.

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    10 months ago

    Back in the day, major news sites like the BBC ran ads that were infected with malware that then infected computers. These weren’t shady sites like people expect you to get viruses from.

    Installed an ad blocker the day that news broke and never looked back. Ads are potentially harmful to your devices.

  • Patches@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    10 months ago

    It is shockingly irresponsible of the Author to not include security concerns of advertisements in their article.

  • SolidVerse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s a necessity. The internet really is unusable without it. Pop-up ads, long unskippable video ads, annoying shovelware scam ads, etc etc.