Hacker News Reader

Comment by EStudley | Hacker News Reader

Adblock was recently sold to an undisclosed buyer[1]. They told users of the switch the same day they started the "Acceptable Ads" program. I don't want someone I don't know controlling which ads bypass my ad blocker..

[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/adblock-gets-sold-acceptable-...

View on HN

To be precise, you don't want someone whose interests oppose your own controlling the ads. I don't use ABP, but paid "acceptable" ads make them a straightforward protection racket, beholden to advertisers who can pay. Google and the other big players can buy them off for pocket change, so they're useless.

> Google and the other big players can buy them off for pocket change, so they're useless.

Why do people post this nonsense. Their use is to block intrusive ads. They are very clear about it and every argument against this has been incredibly misleading.

Whether payment is required or not isn't even clear, because it is mentioned only as a potential.

Like many others, I use an ad blocker at least as much to protect privacy as to reduce annoyances and malware. ABP's criteria for "acceptable" say nothing about tracking, so while they're a step in the right direction, they're mostly irrelevant to me.

The obvious conflict of interest from making payments even optional for advertisers makes them clearly untrustworthy.

> I don't want someone I don't know controlling which ads bypass my ad blocker..

Then I think your only option to remain logically consistent is to not install any ad blocker.

I think there is a big difference here between distinguishing "is this an ad? y/n" vs "is this an allowed ad? y/n"

Because what people want from an ad-blocker is an affirmation of their logical consistency, and not "blocked ads". Uh huh.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com