• Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    If you’re the one paying for internet access, you should also have the right to determine the content that you’re paying to have access to. While something like pi hole could be used to metaphorically take down most of the billboards without impacting the ground below it, even everyday users should be informed about the data advertisers are getting from them, whether it is anonymized or not. Hiding an important setting about data sharing near the bottom of a page in settings doesn’t help anyone but the advertisers.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I agree that it would probably be much better if the setting was set by a pop-up instead (as they say, most users would treat it like a cookie banner anyway), though I still think it’s as morally reprehensible as piracy. If you think one of these aren’t fine, you probably should think the other isn’t either. Like you paid for the TV but the TV doesn’t pay for the cable package; blocking ads removes their revenue.

      • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t you also pay for cable. If I’m paying for a service I don’t want ads also served to me using it.

        • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          If you’re paying for the cable package, yeah. But then you also have the free local channels. Most sites don’t require you to pay for them.

          • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            They had the same amount as modern subscriptions back when cable was as new as the Internet is today