But telling a small newspaper to stop using ads for revenue, when you aren't willing to financially support them is... hypocritical.
In short - just like a lot of "this ids good for you" laws, this will definitely impact smaller companies way more than you think.
How do you know I am not willing to pay?
OK, I'll be the millionth commenter to repeat this viewpoint for the millionth time on HN: nobody has issues with online ads to support their favorite newspaper or creator, people have an issue with tracking and targeting ads.
We've had ad supported websites, forums and blogs since the 90's, but those were generic and harmless, and wouldn't track and target YOU.
So if newspapers or any other websites want to use weaponized ad-tech on me, then excuse me, but I'm gonna block the shit out of them with no remorse, to protect myself.
Because we've been there, done that. How many local or small news outlet subscriptions do you have? I'm pretty sure it's not a lot.
> We've had ad supported websites, forums and blogs since the 90's, but those were generic and harmless, and wouldn't track and target YOU.
And as a result any website with reasonable traffic, would have to put up a million ads - to just break even. Attendance was rising, costs associated with maintenance as well. Advertisers don't want to pay just to show random individuals ads that have close to 0 chance of being useful.
Generic advertising effectively excludes smaller companies from advertising space. If your advertising budget is $50k today, with targeted ads, you can effectively spend it to show your product to people who would be interested in it. Without, you have to spend $1mil on ads to show it to everyone and get results equal to spending $1k with targeted ads.
> weaponized ad-tech
Yes, yes... The "mid 20ies, IT person, with interest in HN" is definitely a weapon to take "you" down. Quit with the hyperbole, no ad tech keeps anything remotely interesting about you.