Show Navigation
Conversation
Notices
-
@antanicus targeted ads were also pitched as being less annoying and more useful to potential customers; a less cynical reasons for adoption
-
If I read a newspaper or blog I read a lot, I can give them some of my money, or I can allow their ads, giving them money from businesses.
-
Does having ads on web pages necessarily need to involve Javascript #bloatware, gathering data on you to target advertising, or worse?
-
@strypey you're lucky if you get that choice. most paywall mechanisms generously provide both subscription AND ads. ;-)
-
Does the whole market have to belong to the #Stacks?
-
@awg I can choose to get rid of ads I don't want to see on the web. What I'm choosing here is whose money to give the paper? Mine or theirs?
-
@awg I don't have any money to spare so its tempting to allow the ads, but...
-
@strypey I just meant in the absolute sense -- they serve you ads. it's only because we're fortunate to have the right browser settings and add-ons that we can "choose" ads in the first place.
-
@strypey tempting, but it doesn't seem you can trust ads to not be a proxy to something more nefarious nowadays. :-P
-
@awg that's the downside. But how do the pros and cons stack up?
-
@strypey imo, no ads. if that means no service if I wasn't ready to pony up for a subscription, it's probably the choice I would make tbh. :-P
-
@antanicus in theory the point of advertising is to tell the public where a product is available. Newspapers are ad-based, but Javascript
-
@antanicus *no* #JavaScript I meant
-
@antanicus of course that turned out to be untrue in practice, due to trackers polluting the web