Stop, Thief! Why Using an Ad Blocker Is Stealing

Page 6 - 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.
Good post JP but after coming here for 15 years, I'd say 90% of your readers are poor wanna-be's that have enthusiast hardware minds that doesn't think anything good is worth more than $100. 70% of your readers are most likely hackers/pirates/crackers/anit-DRM who will bypass anything Paywise and find another place to go. If going Pay-To-Read, the site will probably fail. But we do understand this is a business that needs income of some kind.

Just lower the amount of Ads on this site and your mortgage will be safe. I mean scrolling through 119 comments and watching the counter climb on how many it blocked is just astounding. Legit to what I am interested in or not, 79 ads on 1 story is a TAD too many.

I mean, look at all the people who WOULD put you on a white list if there weren't so many it was utterly distracting... as it is. Your Ad revenue would climb. For now, it seems this site is over compensating for the blocking by making 1 out of every 50 or so who adblock see everything adblockers don't.

Geeks like us crave the new stuff. Reading what they are capable of, their limitations and a special at Cracker Barrel and a sale at Baby's-R-Us just don't go together.

Just my 2 cents. The %'s above are just pulled out of my arse from reading comments for past 15 years.
 
Piss off. Those adds infected my system with crap recently so invasive TWO different continually on scanning systems did not detect it till it was to late. So craptastic that it even disabled chrome's ability to auto update itself and started installing other add related programs that began to appear in the programs list. Now i run adblock non stop.And I only go to about a dozen total websites. Ive caught invasive adds on sites like THG and CNN before. I dont take the chance these days.
 
We need a Digital Millennium Consumer Act to send automatic take down notices to AD servers that steal my bandwidth with monstrous popups and click-hijacks. They brought it on themselves, can't wait till we have AR that can "paint" over real world ADs. I buy what I want not what some PR hipster thinks I should buy.

 
Oh, the poor advertisers!?? Give me a break they are the most obtrusive and annoying things on the planet out side of the tea party and Fox "News". I'm waiting for them to start putting advertising on toilet paper next. Or perhaps feed a mother with the right diet so she can have a baby born with the hospitals name on it's ass. They send you adverting on your cells wasting minutes. Every were you look there are signs advertising something. On this page are ads every where. Heck in articles there are words if you happen to mouse over you spend 2 minutes try to close the stupid pop ups. You know what is also annoying? Bugs but at least they are trying to suck your wallet dry with junk. I love Ad Blocker and I wish it worked even better.
 
Are you reading this in the forums? If you aren't, check them out.
Click to expand...
On Tom's Hardware, links to "read comments in the forums" are always there. On Tom's Guide, where this article is actually posted, links to "read comments in the forums" are never there. Tom's IT - well forget that since comments are through third-party sites.

How about making all the sites consistent and having a "read comments in the forums" link on every article. Then maybe your registered uses would do so.

That you had to post this is something that I find amusing. It should be policy that an OP-ED piece state the author does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Tom's whatever. To me, that would be the mark of a professional site, or a professional author should they state that without such a policy.

Side note:
I've read most of the comments, and I agree with most of them. Unless some were moderated out, I do not recall someone personally attacking the author. I think your readers are among the more sophisticated and, in my opinion, do not need to be told to play nice. As I see it, the more sophisticated who are actually honorable in their intentions do not appreciate being treated like children in being told "be nice kiddies."
 
No, you do not have a right to my bandwidth. No, you do not have a right to my time. No, you do not have a right to my attention.

Neither do telemarketers. That's why I have a blocking device for them also.

Neither does television. That's why I only watch recorded hows and skip the advertising.

Refusing your "service" is not theft. You are an absolute idiot if you think it is.
 
I do PC repair and guess what, clicking on bad ads and drive by attacks in flash based ads are a serious problem. So, guess what. All of my customers now use ad blocking technology. Otherwise they could well be out hundreds of dollars again not to mention risk having their identities compromised. When the onlne ad industry no longer uses flash based ads and no longer uses deceptive ads that redirect you to sites that infect your PC I will consider not using ad block technology.

In short, you want us to read your ads? Make them universally harmless, without deception, and don't break the flow of my content (think newspaper ads or magazine ads or TV type ads after say 15 minutes of programming).
 

ABP with the element hiding ad-on will block those hot word ads without blocking the words. 😉

Somehow, I just don't think the people at any Tom's site get it. Spam got so bad that the US passed the CAN-SPAM act. Part of the reason that this happened is because receiving spam actually costs the spam receiver more to receive it than it costs the sender to send it. Like stated in other comments, when the size of a web page goes to 10 or more times its base size because of the ads, it is definitely costing at least some of the users more than it cost the web site to post it. If advertisers keep pushing things, someone will decide to pass a law that in some way limits advertising. Personally, I would love to see an opt-in site, but such is like seeing a unicorn on this planet anyway.

I run an ad-blocker on this site. I have painstakingly created element blockers so my mouse does not accidentally pop up a dozen or more ads per article that I have to navigate around and that waste my time. From time to time, I turn it off on this site. I find it absolutely amazing that anyone would even remotely consider reading this site without an ad-blocker. Have anyone of you at Tom's read this site without an ad-blocker recently? Do you guys have hosts files that block ad URLs? All of you at Tom's should try reading this site without any kind of ad blocking for a day just so that you are on an even keel with the people who read this site. After you have done that, then come back and preach to us what you have just practiced. Really, Tom's, I do not think you have any idea what this site is like without an ad-blocker.

Lastly, if you want us to view this site without an ad-blocker, then hire someone who's sole job is to review all advertising and ensure and guarantee us that it will not contain any malware. Even malware blockers do not always catch the latest exploits all the time.

One day, I spent about four hours de-crapifying my 86-year old father-in-law's computer that had been infected with all kinds of malware, browser hijackers and other things that he has no idea how it got on his computer and he has no idea not because of memory loss - AND he has anti-malware software installed. I will say it one more time - I really don't think that your understanding of the situation is complete.

A couple of years back, one of Time Warner Cable's execs publicly stated that he thought everyone should be forced to watch commercials. In my opinion, this article rates along side that exec's position.
 
Sounds like a philosophical debate.

Advertising has become horribly abusive. When my nearly 80 year old mother complains to me about being shown a half-naked girl, just because she scrolled past the end of the article she was reading, I would say we have a problem.

Sites like Tom's has gone way overboard in how they utilize the privilege of ad generated revenue. "Oh look, I sneezed and bumped my mouse, now I have an ad popping up in the middle of the article because a word was underlined!" Do you realize that most readers do not want to navigate a mine-field with their mouse? Tech articles are not supposed to be more stressful than video games.

Ad blocking isn't the best option, but it's one of the options that we have. Just telling us to stop blocking your ads is about the worst approach you can take to the situation.

I block ads as a means of proactive self-defense. You started this, Tom's, and if you want it to stop, clean up your act. I can live without you, but you can't live without users. Like everything else in this universe, if you can't adapt to the reality in which you exist, you eventually won't.
 
I have read Toms for many years now, I have followed it's advice and have learnt much, trust me when my PC has an issue, I come to you guys, that is invaluable to me.

I even used to enjoy the targeted advertising for my interests. But now when I visit toms, via android or PC, I have a full page advert (currently Emirates) wasting my GB limit, making web pages hard to read because the format is mangled by the browser, images jumping around and generally making what was an easily accessible web page difficult.

Am I stealing? No, I'm imploring you guys to find new ways to generate revenue and not stoop to [showing too many] ADS. right now I'm seeing advertising for chicago forum, emirates, red hot fares and some video that after 10 seconds hasn't just told me NOTHING about itself but has also STOLEN my limited GB which I pay an extortionate amount for. Be different, please be different from the rest. ads aren't your money source, YOUR VIEWERS ARE.

[Brackets are mod edits. Made due to cursing]
 
Advertising at its core is good. It encourages competition and is informative for consumers. But advertising in the new millennium makes me feel dirty.

-You have to spend $.99 to remove ads from "free" apps.
-You are often mislead by the business tactics advertisers use to lure people in (high audio volume on commercials, authoritative commercials, etc).
-And with advertising around EVERY CORNER OF OUR LIVES it simply becomes annoying and leaves an overall bad taste.

We don't always want to spend our hard earned money... but the world thinks we should.
 
Absolutely ridiculous! The author suggests that it is up to the viewer not only to sit through horribly intrusive and component taxing advertisements, but also that it's up the viewer to supply the antivirus because the website shouldn't have to be responsible to knowing what it's own advertisement stream is installing on customers computers.

I use ad blocker to be able to surf the web and maintain my sanity. I also unblock websites who have proven they can show ads in a reasonable manner. I understand that is how they pay the bills and keep the lights on and I am respectful of that need, when they are respectful of my computing resources and time. It's a two way street and I'm happy to allow reasonable ads on my screen so that a website can generate revenue but I will not be shamed or coerced by unreasonable demands like this.
 
it's MY hardware and ME who is paying for electricity and internet connection so I have right to stop lines of code that I don't want to run...
it's very simple...
 
Tom's would be the perfect place to offer an opinion poll.

My suggestion: Add a button at the top of Tom's home page and label it "Click here if you prefer an ad-free version of Tom's Hardware Website".
 

Now hang on just one minute. The personal attacks here started with the article by your Editorial Director branding people as thieves. it seems that civility is compulsory for your readers but not your editorial staff. I think you might go a way to making amends for that by apologizing.

The argument seems to be that you perhaps don't like foisting advertisements on people but that it's a necessary evil to put food in the mouths of your kiddies. That statement, coming from your Editorial Director, casts a huge stain on the integrity of your editorial work as far as I am concerned. If you are prepared to do things that you don't really like to pull the dollars in - the end justifies the means - then how can we trust that you are not using other editorial means to satisfy potential advertisers?

I'm sorry but as far as I am concerned, this article, written by your Editorial Director, means that in future I cannot trust the impartiality or integrity of editorial content on Toms.

And I'd still like to see that apology from the author.
 
Internet Ads ARE STEALING ... at the end we will PAY it when we buy a product.

Every AD increases the product price and we pay for it.

when the internet was made for the public it was clean and professional.

now it turned into a money making machine ...

well keep the money out of our life for once !

I dont want ads everywhere ! TV and street ads are ENOUGH ! we know the Product already .. stop putting ADS everywhere stop being greedy.

I used to click on a link and the page shows instantly . now I have to wait for stupid ADS servers to respond.

the internet explorers were many times faster in the past . and I mean it . it is not about bandwidth , it is about connecting to each server ...

add to it , we dont WANT to pay more for products ! stop putting adds everywhere , keep the internet for knowledge and information and fun.

ADS companies are the thiefs . not us . we dont want ads !

 
I've used Toms since the late 90's when I was researching RAMBUS memory. But you can go to hell if you think I will allow your site to slow my computer to a crawl and add malware. This is my LAST visit to your site. Good riddance.
 
2 - because I hate browsing and being a tab hoarder (not the worst offender, but I often have 15+ open) and having soulnd playing on 5 of them randomly. If I frequent sites that have no sound enabled or video ads I will add them to my personal whitelist
Click to expand...
THAT is the biggest issue in my estimation. There are so many.... well, I have to call what they are: a'hole ads that automatically start playing LOUD OBNOXIOUS SOUND or more than one video ad on the same page.
Video ads should NEVER be autoplay period and done with. They should be 'click on this ad to play it'.
 
Have anyone of you at Tom's read this site without an ad-blocker recently? Really, Tom's, I do not think you have any idea what this site is like without an ad-blocker.
Click to expand...

Years ago, I mandated that my entire community team whitelist our domains if we have ad-blocking software installed, and I follow this example and browse our domains in full-ad mode every day. When asked why by a team member, I made it very clear: "If our users are experiencing it, you will experience it. If it is bad, then we need to tell the ad guys on their behalf." I also strongly encourage the editorial people to do the same. I don't ask my mods to do this as they are volunteers and they already do so much selflessly without asking a single thing in return, but strongly request they let us know if a disruptive ad is encountered so we can report it and get it removed - and they do.

Lastly, if you want us to view this site without an ad-blocker, then hire someone who's sole job is to review all advertising and ensure and guarantee us that it will not contain any malware.
Click to expand...

Any ad that contains or directs to malware is not permitted here. If you find one that does, shoot me an email at jpishgar@purch.com and I'll be sure it gets seen by the right set of eyeballs for removal. The ad guys themselves are usually pretty good about that.

Unless some were moderated out, I do not recall someone personally attacking the author
Click to expand...

Personal attacks are just that - personal and targeted to an individual. The article author made a broad assessment utilizing a rhetorical device, but didn't attack an individual or disparage a group of people. Comments which have been personally attack oriented here have been, and will be moderated. We're a place to have a sensible discussion and debate about this subject and others, and I'm sure you'll agree that it does no good to go ad hominem.

-JP
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom