standardcitizen

Do we have a link besides a random post from some dude we all don’t know?

Also your points seem to be protest don’t do anything...... so just keep allowing someone in powerful to act however they wish...

I’m sure Hilter would have loved That...: also let’s not forget about the color revolution, seem to do a lot as well.

But hey if we all cherry pick, we can see the world our way rather than reality.

Seems like you’ve never been to Hong Kong or merely stayed in Hong Kong Island or SoHo.... go outside those areas people live in some bad conditions. If fact, many fishing villages use steel sheets for housing.

Take a tour outside the shopping district or the high end business district.

Having lived in both places, it’s clear why their school books repeatly give opinion rather than statements.

Is anyway else underwhelmed by the number of accounts?

Is the information correct or incorrect? I’m not a massive fan boy if such kind of topics either. Often the crazy ones tell us research things that we often bypass.

This is one of those times. I don’t agree with their messaging, but Alex Jones should be allowed. Again I completely whole heartily disagree with him, but we can’t be selective in this area.

We’ve kind of validated him to some degree and made him much much bigger than before.

There is a class of people who feel like they aren’t being heard or lied too. Yet we often use tactics to discredit them.

I think this only embolden them. We can even discuss things, without doing the mental laziness of saying. I don’t wanna look at your source, because it’s x.

Within universities, you can’t use one source, why would you think it’s ok now?

You need supporting claims, if you disagree, than support it.. stop being mentally lazy.

Thanks for getting to the point I wanted. Then I guess ads on these sites don’t matter, as they are so pointless, you’re not Visiting these sites.

However, you still do, so they have value. That value comes at a price, rather you think they are good or not good for the ego system. You’re actions speak in the camp of them being good.

I think we can all agree, some porn and content is not good. However, the value walks with out attention And not our moral desires.

Through out this thread I’ve seen people say they have no respect for Facebook or google and their ads, yet services they use daily. Unwilling to pay, the product is you.

Either pay with your money or lack of attention and this seems like it’s no longer a problem. M

The issue is, we want all this but want to provide them with little or not compensation for their value.

We use to speak with our attention, we didn’t like this store, so we never went there. Today, this extension is merely still going to the store, but ignoring what we dislike.

Thus is the debate.

Sorry for the two post,

I want to pose a question for the community.

60 years ago you paid for news paper. It was direct. Plus they had ads. Business model was clear.

Here my question,

Would everyone be ok with adblocker to have an option for you to pay the owners of the websites you visit?

Instead of them replying on ads, you just pay a fee for each visit. Then there a weekly payment sent to publishers.

I’m not speaking of the likeliness, or the technical issues.

Just the concept.

Interested in hearing you responses.

Ps I’m not a publisher or in ads.

Would you be willing to turn adblocker into a time tracker and you pay for the time on site via a monthly payout via something like PayPal?

If not, would be interested on how you expect publishers to make money?

Beyond all points, I found it interesting how people think they get to control their ads, but at the same time don’t want to pay publishers for content.

I often find it funny when people complain about ads on torrent sites.

I think this speaks of a culture that thinks they should get everything for free.

50 years ago, if you wanted to read the news,you paid for it.

Today , we complain about want ads can the free content providers give us. Yet, we wonder why publishers provide such crap content, because their Main focus is pleasing free users with what ad they will like.

I’m not surprised by how many people speak of micropayment for articles, but no one does it.

The more we block legitment ads, the more crap we’ll see.

The cost to behave nicely becomes too much.

Hacker News has been an amazing place, but more and more things like “evil” for people pushing ads is insane. Evil is hilter, but now you’re comparing you’re as provider in the same way?

Ps not in ads, just a realist.

I’m completely at a lack of words as why people think giving their data to someone means it’s safe or won’t be used for harm.

Anything I post on social media, I assume the worst.

I’m unsure how anyone else can assume any different.

I believe most people are seeing this wrong, there a few issues here.

1) Google is defining standards

This isn’t a drive for web masters and users, it’s our brother Google telling us what’s good and what is bad. While they often fail on their own standards. But hey, they can’t fail to pass, but you cant.. no expections besides big G.

2) We’re focusing on SSL

This isn’t about SSL, but’s about point one.

3) misleading

Reading some basic website that is just a random one page html site, doesn’t care about it at all. This gives basic users( the ones we’re thinking are too dumb to demand ssl) the idea this site is not safe.

Real users think two things;

Safe or not safe.. they don’t understand the gray and now we’re saying Not Secure. A lot of people will think this is not safe, no one is around telling them why this appears as no one in the real world reads this blog besides us.