By your logic, people starving or being bombed could stop famine and wars because they have more motivation. What actually happens: whoever has more power wins.
I have the power over my browser. I won't consume ads.
I have the power over my browser. I won't consume ads.
Following that same hypothetical, you alone can dodge the bombs but most people can't, because let's face it - you're not colluding with others.
And unless you're up to date on bomb tech, even you are eventually going to get hit by a smart "ad".
Furthermore, when the OS vendors are putting ad blocking tech into their browsers, I no longer worry about the ad producers having the better tech. When smart bomb detection is built-in to the OS, all I need is an update and mom and pop can avoid the bombs as well as anyone.
The point is that you're extrapolating your intent and level of control to the rest of the internet audience, which you're not colluding with.
The ad-blocking at OS level is arguably even easier to detect than browser-based. It also doesn't stop advertising in apps, which is an example of how Apple is incentivized to keep advertising for it's own platform (i.e. Apple is looking out for #1 when it comes to blocking ads, not you).
If it gets to the point that sites are placing ads into the content themselves, I will likely end up sticking only to sites that are subscription or donation based.