undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrosser10y ago0 comments

people with morals

Nice.

You might take a moment to consider that some of us who block ads are more concerned about the morality (read: more or less utter lack thereof) of the a̶d̶v̶e̶r̶t̶i̶s̶e̶r̶s̶ trackers than we are the revenue some arbitrary site may or may not lose from missing our impressions before you start casting stones wildly about like that.

I'd probably be very willing to consider whitelisting sites who worked with advertisers that didn't run tracking programs most of the Three Letter Agencies in the West would kill to access — if they didn't already have behind-the-scenes arrangements with them. But that question is probably pretty moot at this point, isn't it?

0 comments

throwaway204810y ago

I prefer the term "online surveillance industry"

TheLogothete10y ago

So pay for WIRED. What's the problem?

tremon10y ago

Paying for Wired does nothing to ensure you won't be tracked anyway.

DannyBee10y ago

So, clearly, you instead just directly pay the authors/etc when you can, right? Or does that all conveniently fall by the wayside in your crusade?

rosserOP10y ago

When they give me a way to, yes, I actually do. I pay for recurrent subscriptions, plural, to sites that offer and warrant it. At least one of them has been running for a decade or more.

Regardless, calling it a "crusade" is the same kind of argument-poisoning that the GP uses with his "people with morals" quip. If you can't have a discussion without resorting to that kind of rhetoric — term used very damned loosely — then, personally, I don't think you've got much of a point.

DannyBee10y ago

"crusade: lead or take part in an energetic and organized campaign concerning a social, political, or religious issue."

Apparently using correct words is now argument poisoning charged rhetoric.

Okay.

Sorry if you don't like when the definitions of words match what you are doing.

"If you can't have a discussion without resorting to that kind of rhetoric — term used very damned loosely — then, personally, I don't think you've got much of a point."

Let's look at who is using rhetoric here: "morality (read: more or less utter lack thereof) of the a̶d̶v̶e̶r̶t̶i̶s̶e̶r̶s̶ trackers than "

Yeah, i guess i couldn't agree more with you.

cyphar10y ago

> So, clearly, you instead just directly pay the authors/etc when you can, right?

Yes, if the content is good enough to warrant paying for a subscription.

> Or does that all conveniently fall by the wayside in your crusade?

Nope, and there's no reason to muddy the waters with terms like crusade.

DannyBee10y ago

"Yes, if the content is good enough to warrant paying for a subscription. "

So if it's not, you just view it anyway?

"Nope, and there's no reason to muddy the waters with terms like crusade. "

It's pretty rich to make a moral argument the way the parent did and have a problem with a term like crusade, which is a precise and correct term to describe this.

1 more reply

anon138510y ago

Of course you think people who block ads are engaged in a "crusade": you work for an advertising company.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsrosser10y ago0 comments

people with morals

Nice.

0 comments

throwaway204810y ago

I prefer the term "online surveillance industry"

TheLogothete10y ago

So pay for WIRED. What's the problem?

tremon10y ago

Paying for Wired does nothing to ensure you won't be tracked anyway.

DannyBee10y ago

So, clearly, you instead just directly pay the authors/etc when you can, right? Or does that all conveniently fall by the wayside in your crusade?

rosserOP10y ago

When they give me a way to, yes, I actually do. I pay for recurrent subscriptions, plural, to sites that offer and warrant it. At least one of them has been running for a decade or more.

DannyBee10y ago

"crusade: lead or take part in an energetic and organized campaign concerning a social, political, or religious issue."

Apparently using correct words is now argument poisoning charged rhetoric.

Okay.

Sorry if you don't like when the definitions of words match what you are doing.

"If you can't have a discussion without resorting to that kind of rhetoric — term used very damned loosely — then, personally, I don't think you've got much of a point."

Let's look at who is using rhetoric here: "morality (read: more or less utter lack thereof) of the a̶d̶v̶e̶r̶t̶i̶s̶e̶r̶s̶ trackers than "

Yeah, i guess i couldn't agree more with you.

cyphar10y ago

> So, clearly, you instead just directly pay the authors/etc when you can, right?

Yes, if the content is good enough to warrant paying for a subscription.

> Or does that all conveniently fall by the wayside in your crusade?

Nope, and there's no reason to muddy the waters with terms like crusade.

DannyBee10y ago

"Yes, if the content is good enough to warrant paying for a subscription. "

So if it's not, you just view it anyway?

"Nope, and there's no reason to muddy the waters with terms like crusade. "

It's pretty rich to make a moral argument the way the parent did and have a problem with a term like crusade, which is a precise and correct term to describe this.

1 more reply

anon138510y ago

Of course you think people who block ads are engaged in a "crusade": you work for an advertising company.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse