And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.

  • Redex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m amazed at how angry people are at ads. I agree that this change would be terrible purely because of the customization thing, but people at some point are going to have to realise that there is no such thing as free lunch. You’re using their service/web site, they say you have to pay by watching ads and thats the deal you have. If you don’t like it, don’t use it, because if ads weren’t a thing, the whole internet would be paywalled (apart from the sites people host from their own cash/donations). The internet and big tech has for so long taken the stance to grow fast make money later, but many never do. I feel like the time of reckoning is soon upon a large part of the internet, where if they don’t make money, they’ll vanish.

    Edit: just so I clear it up before anybody starts yelling at me about it, I am very much against this change for multiple reasons, but it’s just that it triggered me to see so many people attacking the wrong thing. We’ve just become spoiled by unsustainable startup practices and have lost touch with reality.

    • z00s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Here’s a website for a newspaper that I was trying tonread earlier. See if you can spot any actual text from the article.

      • moonmeow
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is absolutely disgusting. How can i take a news organization seriously if they think this is suitable form of consuming their news?

      • Redex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is a non-argument. The fact the website is shit has nothing to do with the fact that ads are the payment method. If you don’t like the site, don’t use it. Nobody is forcing you.

        If you saw a product in the store that costs double another equal product, would you go scream at the manager that this is outrageous? Or would you just buy the cheaper one and let the more expensive one go out of business.

        Yes, an ad blocker would make the site more usable, but so would just taking the product without paying.

        • miss_brainfart
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s completely fair that services need to finance themselves somehow.

          However

          Ads nowadays are

          1. Extremely obnoxious to the point where you can’t even read one paragraph before another banner loads in, moves the content around and screams at you

          2. Not just ads, but also serve as trackers, which just completely goes beyond what an ad should be allowed to be

          So, respectfully: Fuck ads. If a site can’t serve them without respecting what makes those two things a problem, they can [redacted] my [redacted]

        • z00s@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol you’re so full of shit that I can’t see the content in your comment

        • ArtemonBruno
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I started wondering if I missed out a world where stuff comes free. (Although this doesn’t stop me from hating irrelevant “sales pushing” efforts. I think most people just hate the irrelevant part, hopefully)

    • salient_one@lemmy.villa-straylight.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      IMHO, the problem is that the Web should not depend on ads. Ads are destroying the Big Web as this proposal shows. Although it may be a good thing for the Fediverse and initiatives like the Small Web.

      Also there is such thing as a free launch, in a gift economy.

      • ArtemonBruno
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Web should not depend on ads

        .

        there is such thing as a free launch, in a gift economy.

        image1

        Let’s come back to reality, where everyone have to work for a living. Everything needs payments exchange. The advertisement is one of the payment alternative than, donation, taxing, funding, etc. Even gift, you should notice gift comes with company logos, a form of advertisement not so much different from digital sponsorships.

    • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The logic you’re using would mean you’re fine with these companies charging you an admission fee when you walk into their retail stores. You’re using thier land when you walk in. Suck it up.

      See?

      • Redex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        What? No. Their product is the website. It’s like you come into a store, and just take the newspaper without paying.