I'd actually be interested to see an HN poll on this. I do not run an ad blocker and frankly I find most complaints about ads online to be totally overblown. Years ago there was a hellish amount of pop-ups, pop-overs and pop-unders, but these days I really don't have many problems, and I'm happy to support the sites I use.
So whilst I see where you're coming from, you can't just rule out annoying ads all together.
click ew
Adblock ftw.
The main difference I see now is that people with ad blockers talk about frequenting sites which have tons of ads, which doesn't send a message to the owner and probably actually exacerbates the problem since they'll toss bigger, more intrusive ads in ads the clicks-per-visitor rate drops. If I hit a site like that, I'll just leave and go somewhere else which respects its visitors more, particularly if they're savvy enough to follow the lead of sites like ArsTechnica which allow subscribers to disable ads.
If you are used to them and can block them out you're probably mentally doing the same job as an ad blocker.
Well, I can, but it requires a noticeably higher level of focus not to be distracted by movement in my peripheral vision - noticeable enough to be unpleasant.
I just tried disabled my adblocker temporarily; Ars Technica itself has exactly the kind of animated ads that I can't stand.
It's not just ads, though. It's all animations. I use image.animation_mode=once in Firefox to disable looping gif animations, use Flashblock, and generally disable anything that auto-starts whenever possible. The only thing I want animated on my screen is the cursor.
Also, to be fair to internet marketers, ads are much better than they used to be. The old 'punch the monkey style' ads are long gone outside of.. how do you say, questionable sites. Auto-playing videos are rare. Once in a blue moon I actually click on ads that are targeted to me. The system sometimes works.
Railing against ads just seems like a poseur-ish thing nowadays. I also feel especially bad blocking ads from sites I visit regularly. Its a dick-ish thing to do. It just seems better to keep open a dialogue on what we consider acceptable ads and what we consider unacceptable ads. Or help the site owner understand that they're better off with targeted ads or selling their ad space themselves, than joining some shady affiliate group with generic "This school teacher is making $900 a day" crap or, heaven forbid, video auto-play ads (which are pretty rare nowadays outside of news sites/youtube where the content is video but you're forced to sit through 35 seconds of ad before you can see it.)
A lot of annoying content isn't ads at all, its dhtml/css 'pop ups' asking you for your email address or facebook login or survey or whatever. ABP doesn't usually stop those either.
Loudly proclaiming you must use ABP is almost like saying, "Well, I visit tons of shady porn and torrent sites, where its more or less required." The non-shady web just seems like a better place than during the early 2000s when Flash ads ruled. YMMV of course.
If only we all focused on solving this direct payment problem[2] instead of actually actively working to further embed the advertising industry[3].
Sadly my comments along these lines always get downvoted because, as Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7485773
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8008337
[3] "The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads. That sucks." – Jeff Hammerbacher, fmr. Manager of Facebook Data Team, founder of Cloudera
Takes some elbow grease, but the benefits of not loading ads should more than make up for the slowdown from going through a proxy.
[1] https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/mercury-web-browser/id331012...
If you find a site has annoying advertising then stop browsing it and find an alternative. Vote with your browsing habits.