Stop, Thief! Why Using an Ad Blocker Is Stealing

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Since i started running an adblocker and ghostery, my positive checks for viruses and malware dropped by like 90%, and as another poster said, my internet speed has improved.

If you want to test this, go use steams web browser, and tell me the results vs your normal one.

I'm sorry if it hurts some webmasters income, but there's far too much crap displayed on pages, and far too much malicious software roaming the net to do anything but block it all.

Does no one remember roaming the web in 1997? It was a disaster if you went to the wrong site, and now it's getting as bad again because standard sites are doing the same thing.

It's well within the consumer's rights to protect themselves, their data, and their computers from unknown entities that are displayed even on "trusted" sites.
 
Wow, how conceited is this article? - it is each and every person's choice to decide whether they wish to be hounded by advertisements or not. I don't allow random people to knock on my front door attempting to sell me stuff, nor do I or should I allow random companies plastering all over the websites I frequent trying to sell me stuff! - If I don't want it, I won't allow it, nor should I allow it, full stop.

Also as the above commenters have said, there are far too many malicious adverts in the ad networks that try to trick you into clicking them, or downloading something, which will do you more harm than good.

If a website/ad network were to properly manager their advertising to stop these maliscious adverts then I would consider adding them to my whitelist, as websites I frequent (such as Toms Hardware) I wouldn't mind having my eyes raped for a while if it helps them to keep running.

However, simply because this article was allowed to be posted, I will be taking this as Toms Guides official stance on advertising, and I will be removing Toms Hardware from my white list starting today. - You and your advertising revenue be damned!

 
This article could have been better-written by a sophomore in high school. "Blocking ads is like taking food from a child's mouth." Really? Hyperbole AND a "do it for the children" pathos appeal?

If ANY advertisements, even on reputable sites, were not complete crap like the "Insurance companies don't want this secret out," or "Plastic surgeons HATE this one simple trick," I wouldn't block them. Five years ago, built-in advertising was actually useful. Now it's 99% clickbait that is misleading on its best day, and outright malicious on its worst.

I don't mind advertising. When Tom's has sponsored content, I don't care. When reputable news outlets have uncurated, misleading advertisements posing as articles or news, I care. Blocking them is an INTENTIONAL protest against their lack of supervision and unwillingness to take responsibility for and ownership of the content presented on their site. If that means the site shuts down, SO BE IT. That is the price they pay for their lack of attention to their product.
 
Articles like this, that are outright specious, that whine and deem blatant lies as empirical truth, out of self interest do not deserve my respect or time. Don't worry though, there is a solution. If the advertisers aren't paying your site well enough because of a monetized views/clicks quota that's not being reached. I'm sure the Tom's community could assist with a donation type system, that way you can all buy yourselves a WAAHHmburber and french cries. With that said, things would change for the better if this article proposed an alternative solution. Give members the ability to donate for an ad free experience. Write an article explaining the situation, and ask for feedback or even run a poll. I'm sure that would receive a much more positive reception, instead of writing an article the way a seasoned advertiser would - devious. It's only going to drive people to steer clear from this site. I would think long and hard about it. Pretty much every single comment on here is solid proof that the Tom's community views this article as a joke.
 
Be more proud of your content Toms.
Why not run a premium service? Make it ad-free and hide some content behind a pay wall, Foster your community and love them and they will love you back.
If you don't want to put the effort into your community or you don't think your content is good enough to get enough premium members to support you through hard time's then you've got no right to complain when someone uses ad-block.
Do a better job!
Simple as that.
 
Wow how conceited is this article? - anybody and everybody has a right to decide whether they wish to allow adverts to show in their browsers. I don't allow random people to knock on my door and try to sell me stuff, so why would I or should I allow random companies try to sell me stuff on the websites I frequent?

As other commenters have stated, there are far too many malicious advertisements in these ad-networks, trying to get you to click on them to fish your details, trying to get you to download things, fake download buttons and everything. If websites and their ad-content networks would properly administer the advertisements that get shown then I would consider adding them to my white list.

Take Spiceworks for example, they only show legitimate advertisements, and even have a little message that pops up stating that they receive ad-revenue from the advertisements and that they are clean and unobtrusive. - so naturally, they're on my white list.

However, purely because of the fact that Toms Guide allowed this article to be posted, I shall take this as being Toms Guide's official stance on advertising, and I shall be removing them from my white list as of this moment. - damn you and damn your advertising revenue!!
 
Agree with most all comments. Slow Connections at work. Capped at home. Want to see only what I came to see. Hell, adblockPlus already blocked 45 on this page. And on main page when I continue to scroll through all of the news articles, it can get over 500. When you have a cap, that's too much.

I think sites like weather.com was advertise.com with a pinch of weather.

Also, on Win10 when I made Chrome or Firefox my default browser, it asked why. I type in, each and everytime it comes up, Because I want adblock. I don't surf without it.

Criminal? Come get me. Otherwise, thanks for the adblock advertisement.
 
Not once in my 16 years of surfing the internet I have deliberately clicked on an advert.
I use an add blocker because things have grown out of control - some websites have more adverts than content regarding the subject I want to read about. I don't mind having one banner on top of the website and/or one on the left/right but these days are long gone.
I know what I need in my life I don't need adverts to tell me that.
 
Toms writing about ad block being evil just got it removed of my whitelist, thanks tom for showing who you really care for, I'll do the same.
Click to expand...

Brilliant! I'll do the same and remove them from my daily website visits!

Registered an account just to post this although I have been an anonymous reader for years.
 
So is it also "stealing" every time I change the channel or mute the TV whenever commercials come on? How about when I add my phone number to the Government Sponsored, "Do Not Call" list? Isn't that ad blocking as well?

I've realize that the intention of advertisement is to make an individual aware of some product or service, but I, for one, do not need (or want) it shoved down my throat. If I want a product or service, I have the resources to find it on my own.

-Wolf sends
Click to expand...

By this logic, of course. I'm beginning to think that what this is actually going to cause is the death of for-profit web journalism. "What?" I can hear you all scream. Hardware review sites are not going to stop existing, even if there is no money at all to be made it in. There are plenty of people who are willing to review hardware, at little to no profit (small tech sites are already run by them). The only thing this is going to cause is the death of big for-profit organizations.

Heck, if this becomes a bit problem I may launch my own non-profit site. I'm sure I can manage a review or two a month myself and I can get a few more people on to write a few more. Redirect the time I spend writing these comments into news posts and yeah... Ad-supported web journalism may be under assault, but it's not going to change much in the long term.
 
I agree on the extortion viewpoint, either you block ads or you don't, not "I will block you till you pay me not to", if that is the case (though I have NOT seen that -more adverts from those with big budgets- with any of the adblock software I use normally).

That said, I believe the author is coming from the viewpoint that the content posted to TH or any Online Medium is the sole and only property of said author, and we should in some way 'pay' for the privilege in some manner to the author for providing that content. As is the approach done by the mentioned Sony about it's Intellectual Property it created in the manner of a entertainment movie. This is both disproportionate and unequal comparison.

The author is misguided as the point of the Internet is access to everything for everyone no limitations. The point to 'share' information, not as a monetary revenue stream. Hence why ANYONE can get Internet access can just set any computer as a 'server' and dole out a website, aka a weBLOG, and post what they want for anyone to see.

As the author demands to be compensated for the work as Magazines do, newspapers, etc, but then again how many times in a given hour is someone picking up a Magazine, newspaper, etc. reads something then puts it back and walks away without paying - they STOLE that printed information didn't they? QUICK call the Police, this major crime has been costing publishers BILLIONS of dollars a month with all the news papers, magazines, zines, etc. at B. Daltons, Airports, Newsstands, Starbucks, etc. around the globe by Millions of people committing this heinous act. We should keep all print in any form with high end security guards to ensure that each author's child isn't starving because someone picked up World News Today at the checkstand and read how Elvis is running for the 2016 Election and put it back never paying the brilliant and hardworking author for that deep thinking extremely difficult piece of writing.

Seriously, you are completely off base on this article. You want to be compensated for your work, that it is that exclusive and that important, THEN make your own Pay for Online / Print magazine and charge people for it, stop working for TH or other 'websites'. Don't blame the viewers whom are trying to protect themselves from their machines being brought to its knees (remember what AOL did with the adverts and how that work out well for AOL???) or commonly not 'monitored' and instead either pushes malicious code / uses social engineering to make it appear TH / etc. knowledgeable authors are trying to 'help' the reader by alerting of a problem only fixable with Windows Antivirus 2016, etc. which is really malware/ransomware/etc.
 
I agree with you but you have the power to choose good ads or bad ads. If you wanna put up all the deceiving ads like YOU WON CLICK HERE TO RECEIVE VIRUSES then [i'm not happy - mod edit]. Put up some legit ads maybe do some background research on the company. Google Ads are fine, simple, small, non instrusive and I don't block them.

[Mod edits - please don't curse on the forums, it's against our policies]
 
Well I would have to agree and disagree with this.

I agree because lots of advertisements do need a source of income, however they could advertise better.

I disagree on some of the things you said because of 3 reasons:

1. Half the adds I see are inappropriate and go against my worldview of Christianity. An ad blocker helps me keep myself from these inappropriate distractions and allows me to use the internet without needing to worry about stumbling.
2. I have never EVER bought an item because I saw an ad on the TV or web. So either the advertisers have to do better at advertising, or look for other ways of income.
3. The WWW is not regulated via the government (at least for now), so for me to block ads on websites is perfectly legal.


Anyways these are my thoughts on the subject.
 
When I stop getting infections or AV security prompts from 3rd party adds on websites even though I NEVER click on them I'll stop using Adblock. Ads are also becoming bloatware on every webpage as well...
 
Same thing happens when I browse using my mobile phone - it brings my phone to a crawl. I just avoid those websites from now on. I stopped watching TV because of ads. Prescription medication ads just make me sick. Ads used to be cool - especially beer and auto commercials back in the 80s.
 
Once you guarantee that I won't get a virus from a malicious web advertisement I'll consider whitelisting sites that don't have obtrusive ads. If I were to unblock ads on a website that has obtrusive ads then I'd stop visiting the site anyway, so you wouldn't make money on me as it is. Two key words here - no viruses, unobtrusive ads.
 
Oh, what a flaming wad of whiny poppycock! I don't even really have anything to add that hasn't been said already.

Maybe I should just set up a filter for any articles by Avram Piltch? I mean, if I don't read any of their articles, I'm probably stealing from their kids' mouth, but at least I'm not stealing their content, right?
 
The fact that the main add in the home page (http://www.driverupdate.net) is adware is the main reason I use adblock.

If serious website would not associate tho these kind of business, use fake download buton maybe we would not need that.

What about the people who get infected by adware, without their consent, isn't that stealing. It's definitively lying.
 
/wipes a tear. I don't think I've E V E R seen Every comment with a thumbs up on Tom's Hardware. nVidia/AMD Intel/AMD Android/Apple Fanboys/girls all have peace on this article. If only the world could come together like this. Just makes me *sob* so happy. Now excuse me while I weep tears of joy.
 
I appreciate all the lively debate, especially the disagreement. I'm always excited when one of my articles sparks a discussion (hopefully a respectful one on both sides).
Click to expand...
The problem here is that your article was disrespectful toward your readers, calling many (a majority?) of us thieves. You would not have a platform from which to speak were it not for us, your readers.

Nobody likes the most annoying ads, not even the people who run them, and I think we're going to see a shaking out of some of the worst offenses, not because of ad blockers, but because of performance issues. However, when you run an ad blocker, you are denying a site all of its ad revenue which, for millions of content sites, is their main source of income. Eventually, this will lead not only to lots of lost jobs, but to the end of most free content on the web.
Click to expand...
So, the business of running websites will have to be shaken out. Not because of ad blockers, but because the entire paradigm is flawed. We may SEE ads, but we don't click on them.

This has led to the more and greater intrusiveness and annoyingness (to coin a word) of ads, trying to get us to pay attention and to click on them. You, as a website, don't get much revenue from the ads themselves; you get revenue from click-through traffic. So you should be complaining not just about ad blocker users, but also ad ignorers. . .

I disagree that using an ad blocker is the same as a TV remote control or DVR fast forward. Neither of those remove the ads so you do have the opportunity to not change the channel or not fast forward. As a TV viewer, I usually end up watching commercials rather than bothering to switch back and forth and risk missing when the show comes back on. With DVRs, sometimes I just let it play because I'm too lazy to pick up the remote and, other times, I see a commercial that looks so interesting that I stop to watch it. That's not possible when all ads are filtered out before you can even choose to skip them.
Click to expand...
You admit to watching commercials? When you can just click a button and skip them? Wow.

And if you have a site blocked and it is running mostly high-quality ads, you would never know.
Click to expand...
This would assume there was such a thing as a high-quality ad.

Even during the Super Bowl. . . I'm still waiting.
 
I see no ads on this page, and I am not using any adblocker software. I am a Linux user, and I have a massive HOSTS file. In this event, I am not seeing the ads, but AdBlocker isn't holding your advertisers hostage, either.
 
I tried for the longest time to not run Ad blocking, then one day last year, I was trying to read a great article on Tom's, An Ad poped up, I moved my mouse to it to close it, then moved the mouse off the screen to continue reading, it passed yet another Ad, this time I carefully moved my mouse around the maze of Ad hot words, closed the offending ad, and carefully traversed the maze to move the mouse out of the way, and BAM another $%#$% Ad. Never again!

The Ad industry needs to figure out why people have dumped cable and live TV for Netflix, DVR fast forward. People have said enough is enough. Trying to equate Ad blocking with starving children, is just low, and absurd. To that I say, then get a real job if you can't provide for your family!

Ads have gotten so bad, that without protecting ourselves, we are subjected to malware and viruses and ID theft, yes I just equated Ad blocking to protection and have a more solid argument then starving children!

I was just called last week, our parameter network security noticed an AD tried to contact a C&C server, normally I run Adblock plus, but I was on the server trying to get a driver for the tape drive. Yeah my fault, and normally I would have downloaded from my desktop, but I had only downloaded the tape library driver and not the tape drive driver, so I figured since I was already on the server, might as well go get it.

This is not the type of quality articles I expect from Tom's I come here to read Tech, not about some sob story and trying to convince me that I starve children, steal sandals and commit extortion. I take offense to that. I am a father, and upstanding citizen who works hard and provides for my family honorably, legally, proudly!

~Majorlag
 
Oh please...Now I'm a thief because I don't allow adds to litter my web browsing experience? Add pushers are thieves for stealing my time by creating pop-ups that block me from viewing the content I'm trying to get to. I guess I'm also stealing when I use my junk mail filter and when I throw away junk mail from my snail mail box. Now I wish I had my time back from reading this gibberish. Ill-conceived article.
 
One word - Security! Not having an ad blocker today is sadly asking for problems. Cry the other way Toms, its your advertizes that send out malware, not us readers who need to protect ourselves from those kind of threats!

I dint even need to go to the intrusive add parts to justify the usage of an ad blocker! The day you can 100% guarantee that your adds are secure and take full responsibility if they ain't - ill whitelist the site again, untill then - I need to protect my computer!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom