|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". Show nested quote +On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection?
|
Can we kill the elephant and feed his meat to starving Africans? I mean surely quick death would be better than suffering from ad-blocking for eternity.
|
On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection?
I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security.
|
On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection?
What is the point of this thread if you can't discuss why you adblock TL ?
I mean just close it already lol.
|
On November 05 2011 04:41 jester- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 04:31 Mogget wrote:On November 05 2011 04:21 gds wrote:On November 05 2011 04:03 visual77 wrote:
I don't think it is so much that people who view ads see themselves as above those who don't. At least for myself, it is a disgust with the type of posters who say things to the effect of "I have it turned off and I'm happily denying TL any ad revenue." Note that I'm not saying you said that, or anything to that effect, but that vibe has been put out by a number of people in this thread.
And what about the vibe that all adblockers are huge piece of shit in this thread? We think they are because they, because they are denying money to a fantastic organisation because they don't want a tiny banner here or there? or cant watch 5 seconds of adverts every now and then in exchange for otherwise COMPLETELY FREE CONTENT. Its not elitism, we're not bigging ourselves up, we're calling you out for what you are. How can anyone disagree with this logic... Calling people pieces of shit because they don't want to view commercial advertisements? Have you ever heard of freedom of choice? Using your logic, I'd say that you're worse because you criticize people for exercising their freedom on the internet by not viewing ads and you are actively participating in open discrimination with hateful intent. I can't go into your "comment" any further without getting disrespectful.
Are you for real? "Freedom of choice?" Im not saying your NOT ALLOWED to do it, im saying, if you do it, your a selfish person and as such should expect to be judged by others. Or do you think that we shouldn't be allowed to cast moral judgments?
Like i dont understand how you can think its not selfish, its denying an organisation that gladly gives you content for free, GOOD content, just becuase you dont fancy watchign an advert, its pathetic, its selfish, and you should be ashamed. At the very least, you should be able to accept that people are going to look down on you. I dont HAVE to give my seat to the elderly, i dont HAVE to help someone who's getting mugged, I dont HAVE to be faithful to my girlfriend, but if i think i can not do those things and not be looked down on for it, i must be some special kind of moron.
|
On November 05 2011 05:07 Anarion wrote:
Can we kill the elephant and feed his meat to starving Africans? I mean surely quick death would be better than suffering from ad-blocking for eternity.
Elly's female!!!
|
On November 05 2011 05:08 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection? I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security.
Though I agree with your logic, having a tiny, unobtrusive advert that doesn't change the viewing experience of the website (unless you're into cute crying elephants) isn't exactly a breach of privacy or security. No one's collecting any information on you.
|
On November 05 2011 05:10 hazelynut wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:07 Anarion wrote:
Can we kill the elephant and feed his meat to starving Africans? I mean surely quick death would be better than suffering from ad-blocking for eternity. Elly's female!!!
That's good, female animal’s (considering same age with male analog) meat is more tender, I guess higher fat amount helps it.
|
On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection?
I view it more as I'm in your house, and your house is in my house, and our houses are connected to a greater network of houses which is itself connected to several large house networks.
Of course all of these houses are filled with cats.
(this is the best explanation of the internet ever)
|
On November 05 2011 05:11 Xpace wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:08 mmp wrote:On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection? I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security. Though I agree with your logic, having a tiny, unobtrusive advert that doesn't change the viewing experience of the website (unless you're into cute crying elephants) isn't exactly a breach of privacy or security. No one's collecting any information on you.
You're wrong about the information collection. It's unobtrusive, but it's there. Google in particular is the largest accumulator of behavioral data -- they use this information for their own business, sell it to others, and the government can tap into it. Ads that are allowed to run arbitrary Javascript leave all sorts of data trails in your browser and are able to read data left by other sites.
Flash-based advertisements are especially dangerous, as Flash is one of the most insecure elements of the browsing environment. Major system-compromising vulnerabilities are found in it periodically, and the code is proprietary.
I can go on, but this needn't become a side discussion.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On November 05 2011 05:08 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection? I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security. I'm not saying you don't have a right to what you do on your computer. I'm saying that your analogy is patently ridiculous.
And I just have to laugh at the idea that TeamLiquid somehow wants to take over your computer. I guess I have some more perspective on that, but it's really a notion I can't take seriously.
|
On November 05 2011 05:10 Mogget wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 04:41 jester- wrote:On November 05 2011 04:31 Mogget wrote:On November 05 2011 04:21 gds wrote:On November 05 2011 04:03 visual77 wrote:
I don't think it is so much that people who view ads see themselves as above those who don't. At least for myself, it is a disgust with the type of posters who say things to the effect of "I have it turned off and I'm happily denying TL any ad revenue." Note that I'm not saying you said that, or anything to that effect, but that vibe has been put out by a number of people in this thread.
And what about the vibe that all adblockers are huge piece of shit in this thread? We think they are because they, because they are denying money to a fantastic organisation because they don't want a tiny banner here or there? or cant watch 5 seconds of adverts every now and then in exchange for otherwise COMPLETELY FREE CONTENT. Its not elitism, we're not bigging ourselves up, we're calling you out for what you are. How can anyone disagree with this logic... Calling people pieces of shit because they don't want to view commercial advertisements? Have you ever heard of freedom of choice? Using your logic, I'd say that you're worse because you criticize people for exercising their freedom on the internet by not viewing ads and you are actively participating in open discrimination with hateful intent. I can't go into your "comment" any further without getting disrespectful. Are you for real? "Freedom of choice?" Im not saying your NOT ALLOWED to do it, im saying, if you do it, your a selfish person and as such should expect to be judged by others. Or do you think that we shouldn't be allowed to cast moral judgments? Like i dont understand how you can think its not selfish, its denying an organisation that gladly gives you content for free, GOOD content, just becuase you dont fancy watchign an advert, its pathetic, its selfish, and you should be ashamed. At the very least, you should be able to accept that people are going to look down on you. I dont HAVE to give my seat to the elderly, i dont HAVE to help someone who's getting mugged, I dont HAVE to be faithful to my girlfriend, but if i think i can not do those things and not be looked down on for it, i must be some special kind of moron.
So basically, this thread was made for people who don't block ads on Team Liquid to feel good of themselves, and bash/judge anyone who does? Judgements can be made, sure, whatever, we do it everyday when we walk around town. Anyone we pass by is under our scope of judgement whether they like it or not. But we don't go up to them saying "you're a fat ugly twat, you shouldn't ever wear short shorts". We keep the judgement to ourselves.
Now sure, if someone in this thread went ahead and said "fuck that, I block ALL ads, screw TL for having ads!!", then that's obviously a different story.
|
On November 05 2011 05:18 Xpace wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:10 Mogget wrote:On November 05 2011 04:41 jester- wrote:On November 05 2011 04:31 Mogget wrote:On November 05 2011 04:21 gds wrote:On November 05 2011 04:03 visual77 wrote:
I don't think it is so much that people who view ads see themselves as above those who don't. At least for myself, it is a disgust with the type of posters who say things to the effect of "I have it turned off and I'm happily denying TL any ad revenue." Note that I'm not saying you said that, or anything to that effect, but that vibe has been put out by a number of people in this thread.
And what about the vibe that all adblockers are huge piece of shit in this thread? We think they are because they, because they are denying money to a fantastic organisation because they don't want a tiny banner here or there? or cant watch 5 seconds of adverts every now and then in exchange for otherwise COMPLETELY FREE CONTENT. Its not elitism, we're not bigging ourselves up, we're calling you out for what you are. How can anyone disagree with this logic... Calling people pieces of shit because they don't want to view commercial advertisements? Have you ever heard of freedom of choice? Using your logic, I'd say that you're worse because you criticize people for exercising their freedom on the internet by not viewing ads and you are actively participating in open discrimination with hateful intent. I can't go into your "comment" any further without getting disrespectful. Are you for real? "Freedom of choice?" Im not saying your NOT ALLOWED to do it, im saying, if you do it, your a selfish person and as such should expect to be judged by others. Or do you think that we shouldn't be allowed to cast moral judgments? Like i dont understand how you can think its not selfish, its denying an organisation that gladly gives you content for free, GOOD content, just becuase you dont fancy watchign an advert, its pathetic, its selfish, and you should be ashamed. At the very least, you should be able to accept that people are going to look down on you. I dont HAVE to give my seat to the elderly, i dont HAVE to help someone who's getting mugged, I dont HAVE to be faithful to my girlfriend, but if i think i can not do those things and not be looked down on for it, i must be some special kind of moron. So basically, this thread was made for people who don't block ads on Team Liquid to feel good of themselves, and bash/judge anyone who does? Judgements can be made, sure, whatever, we do it everyday when we walk around town. Anyone we pass by is under our scope of judgement whether they like it or not. But we don't go up to them saying "you're a fat ugly twat, you shouldn't ever wear short shorts". We keep the judgement to ourselves. Now sure, if someone in this thread went ahead and said "fuck that, I block ALL ads, screw TL for having ads!!", then that's obviously a different story.
"i want to block adds and deny teamliquid income for pretty much no reason, but i dont want people to be mean to me"
Sorry, thats all i can hear
EDIT: and its not about feeling good about yourself, i consider it to be the standard thing to do, im genuinly suprised and appauled that so many people add block TL, im not elevating myself, im just comdemming you
User was warned for this post
|
well, the adds are just1 add here in the netherlands, fucking colgate toothpaste crap
really starts to irritate when u see it for the 9999999999th time
|
South Africa4316 Posts
On November 05 2011 05:08 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection? I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security.
I think he was just pointing out that your metaphor is even stranger since TL doesn't visit you, you pull TL into your home forcefully.
I don't think anyone on TL would deny that you have be concerned with your privacy and security. That said, I have personally never met any legitimate businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, nor do I believe that you are accusing TL of being such a business, so I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Yes, there are good reasons to have adblock, a firewall, and antivirus installed, but these security reasons surely do not extend to TL. That's not to say there aren't other reasons though.
|
On November 05 2011 05:17 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:08 mmp wrote:On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection? I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security. I'm not saying you don't have a right to what you do on your computer. I'm saying that your analogy is patently ridiculous. And I just have to laugh at the idea that TeamLiquid somehow wants to take over your computer. I guess I have some more perspective on that, but it's really a notion I can't take seriously.
Its not TL thats trying to take over your computer; its advertisers. A notorious exploit happened recently where having Flash installed allowed ads served by google ads (which TL uses) to run arbitrary and malicious code. Adobe was unable to patch the vulnerability for an entire week. I work in IT and had to deal with the fallout from that one personally.
I think everyone should get behind a no-ads account upgrade on TL that people can buy. That would solve a huge part of this argument.
|
On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
Being against advertising on principle (or posting it in this thread) is insulting? You know, some people just want to use TL without being sold as goods to advertising companies. Yeah I take public transportation and leave my room quite often. And it sickens me to see fucking ads everywhere and what's worse, there's no adblock IRL.
|
I actually dont know how to turn it off and there are no clear instructions. Maybe if the elephant was a link to steps that turned it off, it might be better
|
On November 05 2011 05:17 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2011 05:08 mmp wrote:On November 05 2011 05:05 tree.hugger wrote:On November 05 2011 05:01 mmp wrote:On November 04 2011 17:30 Manifesto7 wrote:
The people that come to my house don't hang towels over the paintings they deem "not a celebration of the intelligence of man". On November 04 2011 21:12 tree.hugger wrote:
Nobody is being banned because they adblock TL. If you want to adblock TL, that's your prerogative. But then to come into this thread, and justify it with a reason like "I'm against advertising on principle" or "I'm taking a bold stand for my privacy against an Orwellian advertising complex" is simply insulting. Honestly, it calls into question whether you've ever taken public transportation, bought their own food, or even left their room. It's like going to a dinner party and refusing to help wash the dishes, because they'll just get dirty again anyway.
You guys are speaking indignantly even though your 'house invitation' model is severely flawed. (1) I have a house too. It's called my computer. Your HTML is a guest in my house. If I ask you to wipe your feed at the door... well, you don't have a choice, I'll do it for you. (2) If you invite someone over to your house and they tell you that the art you display is offensive, or the food you serve will make them sick... your response should not be 'GTFO ungrateful moochers' unless you're a bad host. You accommodate reasonable requests, or you don't invite people over. Incredible, I never saw it that way. How benevolent of you to invite TeamLiquid into your gracious home. Can I start a collection? I don't see why you're being so rude about this. It's not unreasonable to assert that users have the final say over their own computer's behavior. There are many businesses that aggressively take away user control of their computers, so this is not a minor point to push aside. You should acknowledge that the user has a right to be concerned about their privacy and security. I'm not saying you don't have a right to what you do on your computer. I'm saying that your analogy is patently ridiculous. And I just have to laugh at the idea that TeamLiquid somehow wants to take over your computer. I guess I have some more perspective on that, but it's really a notion I can't take seriously.
I never accused TL of being malicious. All I said was that when you bring 3rd-party code onto your site, you're opening a huge can of worms unless you're able to inspect all of it and give it a thumbs up, which you cannot unless it is all statically served and unobfuscated. Images are (mostly) benign, and I haven't complained about those kinds of ads (nor do I block them).
The analogy is not ridiculous, it's an accurate and sober appraisal of the security vulnerabilities present on the Internet. People who study or work in the field understand the risks, and can therefore appreciate why some users are passionate about this. But your comprehension of the problem is not requisite for its validity.
|
I adblock TL in general but I don't adblock Liquid players and people I want to support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
