Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

What was the agreement? Access for losing privacy and risking malware?



The point is that if you don’t like an ad-supported website, you should simply not read it, not strip the ads and read it anyway.


Would you say the same about changing the font size or the color contrast?

For years I had "flash click to play" for usability reasons (I always have 20-50 tabs open), before ad blocking was a thing - but as a results, ads wouldn't play or show until I clicked on them. Do you think back then I had the obligation to click-to-play the ads?

It is exceedingly simple. If you don't want me to see content without ads, don't serve it to me without ads. If you don't want me to change the font size, serve it as a png so I can't change it.


What about skipping ads on TV by fast-forwarding? What about going to the toilet while ads are playing live?

The argument breaks down sooner than you think.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: