• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    That’s totally fair.

    That said, the current choices are:

    • make an account, enter personal info, and pay a monthly fee
    • be tracked across the Internet by advertisers, who’ll try to manipulate you into buying stuff

    That’s a crappy set of options, so it’s no wonder people opt for ad blockers since both alternatives involve sharing personal information (which is likely to be exposed in a breach).

    Instead of that, I want these choices:

    • microtransactions through my browser that pays for content I access (with a monthly cap)
    • privacy respecting ads served by my FOSS browser based on local browsing history (doesn’t talk to the Internet)

    Advertisers still get relevant advertising, but they don’t get the personal information, just data about which ads were accessed due to which categories. Users could choose which sites to pay for directly, and which to pay for via ads, the only change is that privacy is preserved.

    • Zerush
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think that ads which are related to the content of the page you visit is the best solution, there are no adicional informacion needed, nor these from the browser or other sources, you visit a page with information related to computers and find ads and banners from computer brands. That is. It is absurd to see there food ads, because you visited before the catalogue of an supermarket which filled you with trackers. The only problem is surveillance advertising, which must be declared illegal, without these surveillance and tracking, ads ar not the problem and no more need of an half a dozen blockers and scripts to avoid this crap.