China Reforms Advertisement Policy, Banning Ad Blocking

[Noxx]

Why should any of us have to pay more - why ? - because we aren't suckers for ads and buy none of it. Hmmm - it's a fricking rip-off - just a way to extract more money out of people.

Good strategy -- I will make your experience so overwhelmed with ads - that you will gladly pay me more money to remove those ads.

It is people that allow themselves to be victimized by this sort of behavior.

That's another reason why KAT was so popular...

I don't care. I hate commercials, they ruin television. Don't get me wrong, I have no respect for these cable companies and their stupidly expensive bills that give the illusion of more. But I hate commercials so much that I would be happy to pay more for no commercials. In fact, I don't even have cable anymore. I use NETFLIX and HULU premium

 

[hjlbx]

I don't care. I hate commercials, they ruin television. Don't get me wrong, I have no respect for these cable companies and their stupidly expensive bills that give the illusion of more. But I hate commercials so much that I would be happy to pay more for no commercials. In fact, I don't even have cable anymore. I use NETFLIX and HULU premium

Cable is one of the great rip-offs of the century.

 

[Noxx]

Cable is one of the great rip-offs of the century.

If it wasn't then, it is now. This is why I like HULU and NETFLIX. UNFORTUNATELY, it's just a matter of time before they see the dollar signs. I remember my parents would tell me stories of how they said "oh, we'll just have light ad experiences, nothing of any real inconvenience", and then it became "oh, we'll just have moderate ad experiences", and then we got the kind of crap you'll see during Walking Dead commercial breaks. Good luck to all the people who can withstand 4 minutes of television followed by 4 minutes of commercials.

 

[hjlbx]

It is all about people that already have a lot of money telling the government "Hey, we need this to make (more) money."

Government officials listen to that sort of nonsense... why ? -- because it is their job -- not to mention corruption.

I remember the internet when there wasn't even a single browser. The experience back then was a lot different than it is today -- obviously. Some of the changes have been for good others for ill.

As long people can make money off of something, in the end, it will get all screwed up... and that is reality.

 

[DJ Panda]

Most of these "annopannopying" ad problems can just be a matter of paying for an ad free experience on certain websites rather than make others suffer. Not all sites have bad or annoying ads. I use Googles AdSense to see Malwarebytes and Avast ads all the time and it doesn't bother me..

 

[hjlbx]

Most of these "annopannopying" ad problems can just be a matter of paying for an ad free experience on certain websites rather than make others suffer. Not all sites have bad or annoying ads. I use Googles AdSense to see Malwarebytes and Avast ads all the time and it doesn't bother me..

Sooner, or later, all cable companies will break internet service completely out of their packages - and sell ad-free internet at an exorbitant premium. There is already a few that cost something like $200 U.S. per month... add televison "premium" cable to it and it costs $300 - $350 U.S. per month.

Why should anyone have to pay a premium for an ad-free on-line experience ?

 

[Noxx]

Sooner, or later, all cable companies will break internet service completely out of their packages - and sell ad-free internet at an exorbitant premium. There is already a few that cost something like $200 U.S. per month... add televison "premium" cable to it and it costs $300 - $350 U.S. per month.

Why should anyone have to pay a premium for an ad-free on-line experience ?

They're already threatening people with increased internet bills if you try and drop cable. I know, because I was one of them.

 

[hjlbx]

They're already threatening people with increased internet bills if you try and drop cable. I know, because I was one of them.

It's always about money. As long as people and companies think they are entitled to make money off of something, then these types of behaviors will never end until the very last human dies...

 

[DJ Panda]

Sooner, or later, all cable companies will break internet service completely out of their packages - and sell ad-free internet at an exorbitant premium. There is already a few that cost something like $200 U.S. per month... add televison "premium" cable to it and it costs $300 - $350 U.S. per month.

Why should anyone have to pay a premium for an ad-free on-line experience ?

I think that companies of all different area rich or poor will rebel against adblocker. Not all of them serve mavertising, some only have 1 or 2 ads. If you want content but with less ads you can always search for it on a different website or go to a library.

 

[Atlas147]

Even still just be careful where you go on the internet and have a good security product and you're good. Too many people have adblock enabled everywhere and eventually that will cause problems.

I actually think that adblocking is helping to improve media as a whole, now that content makers cannot rely on banners and other pop up ads for their revenue they are making other content and making an effort to fuse a sponsor in there, making the entire media experience that much more enjoyable

 

[DJ Panda]

I actually think that adblocking is helping to improve media as a whole, now that content makers cannot rely on banners and other pop up ads for their revenue they are making other content and making an effort to fuse a sponsor in there, making the entire media experience that much more enjoyable

Other small/new companies would get outclassed easier without banners. Banners involve that too. If you remember if a few of my posts other sites can sponsor with Malwarebytes and other security products and have those banner ads you aren't just limited to certain kinds of ads. You can spice hit up with Ad Sense.

 

[hjlbx]

I actually think that adblocking is helping to improve media as a whole, now that content makers cannot rely on banners and other pop up ads for their revenue they are making other content and making an effort to fuse a sponsor in there, making the entire media experience that much more enjoyable

Ad-blocking greatly improves a user's on-line experience.

If a company is reliant upon pop-up\banner ads to remain solvent, then that company is not very good and probably won't last for long.

This is all about the click-ad revenue model - which itself should be made illegal instead of ad-blocking itself.

It's all about money. There is so much money to be made in click-ad revenue, it's the very reason for click-fraud (Poweliks, Kovter, etc).

Plus, so much of click-ads links to complete dead-end nonsense.

Click-ad revenue model is a scam...

 

[DJ Panda]

Ad-blocking greatly improves a user's on-line experience.

If a company is reliant upon pop-up\banner ads to remain solvent, then that company is not very good and probably won't last for long.

This is all about the click-ad revenue model - which itself should be made illegal instead of ad-blocking itself.

It's all about money. There is so much money to be made in click-ad revenue, it's the very reason for click-fraud (Poweliks, Kovter, etc).

You don't have to click on anything a lot of the ad revenue is based on per view. Not everyone fully cares about money some just need it to stay afloat.

 

[hjlbx]

You don't have to click on anything a lot of the ad revenue is based on per view. Not everyone fully cares about money some just need it to stay afloat.

The vast majority of users -- take a poll - and it will be 99.9 % of users -- do not want ads in their online experience.

At least 50 % of all click-ads lead to some form of direct or indirect fraud...

 

[DJ Panda]

The vast majority of users -- take a poll - and it will be 99.9 % of users -- do not want ads in their online experience.

At least 50 % of all click-ads lead to some form of direct or indirect fraud...

Malvertising can be avoided by not going on shady sites. If there is a compromised sites an AV or Anti-exe will protect the computer. I geuss 99.9 % of people do t want to pay a 1 month subscription to go on sites that still has ads either. If people are going to be aggressive with adblocking companies will be even more aggressive and limit access the sites we currently go on.

 

[Atlas147]

The vast majority of users -- take a poll - and it will be 99.9 % of users -- do not want ads in their online experience.

At least 50 % of all click-ads lead to some form of direct or indirect fraud...

Have to agree with that, the fact that most of the ads are based on clicks would lead a lot of them to push for more intrusive ads to make sure you accidentally click on them when navigating which is technically not illegal, or would introduce malware to generate more clicks, aka more revenue

 

[Atlas147]

Malvertising can be avoided by not going on shady sites. If there is a compromised sites an AV or Anti-exe will protect the computer. I geuss 99.9 % of people do t want to pay a 1 month subscription to go on sites that still has ads either. If people are going to be aggressive with adblocking companies will be even more aggressive and limit access the sites we currently go on.

would you count the new york times as a shady site?
Major sites including New York Times and BBC hit by 'ransomware' malvertising

 

[DJ Panda]

would you count the new york times as a shady site?
Major sites including New York Times and BBC hit by 'ransomware' malvertising

This was over a few months.. Have an AV or other fourm of protection malicious software will be detected. I have never been hit with a malvertising attack and only have an AV and AM protected me

 

[hjlbx]

Malvertising can be avoided by not going on shady sites. If there is a compromised sites an AV or Anti-exe will protect the computer. I geuss 99.9 % of people do t want to pay a 1 month subscription to go on sites that still has ads either. If people are going to be aggressive with adblocking companies will be even more aggressive and limit access the sites we currently go on.

I am not talking about malvertising. I am talking about overt fraud - ripoffs.

The vast majority of people do not want to pay extra for ad-free.

When the internet started there were no ads. Over the years the complaints about online ads has become stronger and stronger.

The problem is not users blocking the ads, the problem is all the garbage ads people create on-line because they make money from click-ads.

Illegalize the click-ad revenue model, and most garbage online ads will disappear.

How is the user's right not to opt-in to on-line ads (= adblocking) the problem ?

Typical user's didn't create the on-line ad problem... it's the advertisers that created the problem.

Advertisers have been destroying the on-line experience for users.

 

[DJ Panda]

I am not talking about malvertising. I am talking about overt fraud - ripoffs.

The vast majority of people do not want to pay extra for ad-free.

When the internet started there were no ads. Over the years the complaints about online ads has become stronger and stronger.

The problem is not users blocking the ads, the problem is all the garbage ads people create on-line because they make money from click-ads.

Illegalize the click-ad revenue model, and most garbage online ads will disappear.

How is the user's right not to opt-in to on-line ads (= adblocking) the problem ?

Typical user's didn't create the on-line ad problem... it's the advertisers that created the problem.

Advertisers have been destroying the on-line experience for users.

Just use Google AdSense not all smaller sites are able to change within the supply and demand of what the people want. Users may have rights in some things a but when it hurts others like myself and other companies. I do not wish to use an adblocker because too many people use one. If too many people use an adblocker sites will shut down or force you to pay more. Users also don't have to pay a penny for such ad revenue. If you don't want to pay extra to look for something get a different resource.