Follow

:blobnotlike: blocking ads is evil grr
:blobuwu: HTTP is a pull-based medium. it is within the original philosophy of HTTP to selectively pull the data, for example, a device that doesn't support images won't download them. by circumventing ad "blocking", you are spitting in the face of HTTP. a more accurate term would be ad rejection. ads are not "blocked", they are simply not asked for.

LOOK UPON MY GOOD TAKE. READ IT AND ABSORB MY GENIUS INTO YOUR PATHETIC MIND

pda 

@00dani
:blobnotlike: not smooching dani
:blobuwu: smooching dani right on her little snoot

@lynnesbian hey remember when people donated to Lunduke to get him in the W3C????????????

all I'm saying is.... you are a lot more likeable than Lunduke.....

@lynnesbian Which is why Google and pals were pushing (pun intended) HTTP 2.0. Also why they’re pushing for obfuscated/binary formats. We’re already seeing CDNs bake in content and ads and proxy tracking via first-party calls etc., to circumvent blocking. In extension-based blockers that can run arbitrary JavaScript, what we have is literally a JavaScript battle in your browser as the blocker and anti-blocking scripts go at it in a game of cat of mouse. Adtech is malware.

@lynnesbian Spitting in the face of specifications is routine for businesses.

@lynnesbian

I like this line of thinking, that ad blocking is fundamental to the founding philosophy of the web.

And if you don't want to serve content without ads, then don't. That's what Forbes does (or at least did 2 years ago), and is why I just don't ever visit their site.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Lynnestodon

@lynnesbian@fedi.lynnesbian.space's anti-chud pro-skub instance for funtimes