Interesting question. I probably would not, which might mean I would spend less time on the internet reading useless stuff and more time outside on my mountain bike.

I do, and in some cases, I still get ads.

No, and I also use an adblocker

Would you offer the option to?

There's a New Zealand Journalist, David Farrier (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Farrier) and I actually subscribe and pay a monthly fee to be able to view what he writes. I think he's really awesome (some will disagree) but I just like him. He also has a TV series on Netflix called Dark Tourist if you're able to see that.

He has a new movie out at the moment that I really want to see, but his last movie Tickled was _crazy_ like... Tiger King type craziness.

So yeah - if I know someone who actually puts in the work to give me quality output I'd pay for it. Just like I do now.

Yes, can I subscribe to the internet?

Ads are an enabler of bad products. If things required a subscription, half the shit on the Internet would be gone and for good reason. Also, often you get ads anyway regardless of the subscription. This is a false dichotomy.

would you not serve me ads if I did?

All newspapers/magazines, VHS/DVDs, cable TVs etc. were are 'subscription' in the sense you had to pay for them. Ads were still there. If paying a subscription for websites was normalized then soon enough they would as well be filled with ads.

Yes. But I wouldn't subscribe to "content" that is used as a minimum skeleton to hand ads on, and I include the google search engine in that definition. I'm happy to pay for something I value. Most web content I value at $0 and may browse opportunistically but I would never pay for it, including by looking at an ad or providing my email

I've spent hundreds of hours of my life contributing to Wikipedia pages and may spend hundreds more on open source projects. Capitalism has made us label any not immediately self-serving as illogical. We are not homo economicus

There is this concept of supporting people you like without them having to charge people. The more you can read upfront, the more you can make an impartial judgement if you actually like them. A lot of people subconsciously convince themselves that they like something just because they spent money on it. If I like a project or open source software that I use then I go support the developers. A lot of other types of arrangements are basically signing a contract waiving your rights before you've even had a chance to form an opinion.

What's the difference? You already pay the ads on top of every product you buy making everything you buy more expensive, it's already a tax.

The only difference I see is all the money on salaries and expenses related to ads is 100% a pure economic loss in the ad model.

(Of course I'm only talking about the economics here, there's a lot of other bad side-effects of ads not covered here)