And shares revenue with content creators.

I really don’t agree with this. AdBlock Plus is a technically inferior, directly competing standard that sucks up to advertisers by doing something only marginally less scummy than taking bribes to look the other way. These two extensions are both licensed under the GPLv3, but I seriously doubt Gorhill, the developer of uBlock Origin, sees much if any benefit from ABP’s source code. uBO uses ABP’s filter list syntax, but if ABP ceased to exist, the lists would work just the same.

If ABP had their way, they would monopolize adblocking as effectively a protection racket, and being given funding to create that sort of ecosystem is toxic to an open Internet. Giving ABP any money is worse than losing it down a sewer grate. uBO at this point in time should be the only adblocking extension anyone is using, because it’s the one that’s actually working toward a better Internet.

Correct, but you should donate to the list maintainers, not the enemy.

AdBlock Plus takes money to whitelist ads.

This is true and false, for in fact, you see, AdBlock Plus takes money to whitelist ads.

???

If adblockers would allow ads that adhere to the acceptable ads criteria, the world would be a better place. Less paywals, less ads and maybe some companies would pay their employees a little bit more.

I disagree. The system may have began in earnest goodwill, but financial incentive inevitably erodes goodwill. ABP becomes incentivized to adapt its definition of “acceptable” based on potential revenues they stand to gain from increasingly persuasive advertisers. Your vision of a better world under this system is at best temporary.

The alternative model, simply paying for goods and services directly, is a far more robust solution.

That is true and false. Adblock plus takes money

so, it is true then.

All Ads Are Bastards.

I would hardly call any of this steeling, The authors of the articles and the people needed to maintain the website are not being given the full value of there labor, they are already being stollen from, I do not care if the big company cannot make as much money, there profit is the theft of employee wages

Even if you go with the “acceptable” part of that whole thing it’s still shady.

It’s one thing to boycott ads as an individual user (and to “steal” ad revenue from websites) but a completely different thing if you run an external service that steals (without quotation marks) from the revenue pool.

Out of curiosity, what was your CEO and other executives making while claiming “it’s cause ad blockers”?

You delivered some good points. I also work with publishers.

Ad blockers have had an impact, but I think the bigger driver is that premium demand has migrated spending to connected TV (CTV, showing ads on an Internet connected large screen). Publishers just don’t get the rates they used to for web and mobile inventory, even if they’re doing everything right.

I think when another trendy channel like AI ads straight to your brain or whatever pops up we will see another migration.

Good point. And it wouldn’t surprise me if google was still using YTP subscriber viewing data to target them on other platforms and websites. Actually, I’d be surprised if they weren’t doing that.

There’s Yattee. Open Source and works quite well.

it’s still practical to block them, twitch has adblockers and uses the same mechanics, if there’s a client rendered element(such as a pop up box that can be clicked) it’s detectable and therefor skippable or at the very least hidable.

deleted by creator