|
|
|
|
|
|
by roma1n
3069 days ago
|
|
|
Precisely! Offering this as an option (a simple option, not a new business model in itself) would tap into a user base that uses ad blockers already anyway. So yeah, that would establish a sort of ceiling and communicate some information to competitors, but not much more. Anyway I'm convinced there's a solid rationale for not doing it, but I'm not sure what it is. |
|
|
That's usually my mindset.
I mostly see companies as very rational actors, and assume that different options usually have been looked into and discarded in a rational way. Therefore, whenever a company is doing something that doesn't make sense from my POV, I usually think (unless there's clear evidence against it) that there are solid reasons for that.
Sadly, most people (here on HN included) seem to act in a "I'm really smart, and if others are not doing what I think they should be doing is only because they are stupid, not because I don't have the full context from my armchair".
It's one of the aspects of game theory that I like the most: you have to force yourself to consider other agents rational and intelligent actors who will (in the context or corporations) chase profits just as you would.
That's why I trust companies far more than people or the government: I can always trust them to chase profits.