zlacker

>>yuvada+(OP)
Can someone explain what the point of silently clicking the ads is? Why not just block them? Does clicking the ads somehow aid in blocking or is it a way of fighting back against perceived abuses by advertisers?

>>xwowse+P6
It's supposed to mess up the stats and inject uncertainty into ad analysis.

They are trying to bring down the price of ads on the internet, thus making them unprofitable. I hope they succeed.

>>iUsedT+G7
I find it a bit harsh to be so hostile towards online ads. After all, it's has been a significant source of income for innovative companies or services that couldn't exist otherwise, because users are notoriously reluctant to pay for virtual goods.

Yes, tracking and overly intrusive fullpage popups are real issues, but not all ads are inherently evil.

>>blaudi+2b
I can't name a single online service that is supported by ads and that I couldn't live without.

>not all ads are inherently evil.

All advertising is manipulation. Advertisers are bad and should feel bad.

>>_ofdw+uc
> I can't name a single online service that is supported by ads and that I couldn't live without.

How about search and email? All the major players are ad supported.

>>dpark+Ze
I run my own email service. I also find search currently very disappointing. Google, Yahoo, duckduckgo? Remember when they were several major indexes? Lycos, Altavista, etc.

Today Google actively removes things from their index at the requests of various governments and entertainment industries. We have very little choice in search, leaving much of the web unlocatable.

>>djsumd+yh
I don't remember Lycos/Altavista etc rendering anywhere near as much of the web (as a proportion of what existed back then) locatable, having a radical stance on copyright or having less obtrusive ads...

>>notaha+Al
I vividly remember being unable to find anything useful in the first half-dozen pages on Lycos and Altavista and Yahoo and all the others, which is why Google took the entire market when they showed up with PageRank.