[paulcole]

I don't use one.

I like not paying directly for content and accept that ads and tracking are the price I "pay". I personally don't feel comfortable taking something without holding up my end of the bargain.

It's really not a big deal. Sometimes I see products I want to buy or things I looked at and forgot about and end up buying them.

It's also not the horrific and torturous experience I read about on here. I wonder if I'm just going to the wrong sites lol?

[simonblack]

It depends a lot on how much you are paying for your internet service, and/or how fast it is.

If you're paying nothing or just a little, and/or it's very fast then the extra time/cost of the ad content is negligible.

On the other hand, if your internet connection is slow, expensive or you have a small monthly quota, then any time or cost involved in downloading largish volumes of ad content becomes a huge fraction of your costs.

I once had a monthly quota of two gigabytes when travelling. An average of only 60 megabytes per day. It doesn't take many two-three megabyte webpages full of ads to soak up that 60MB daily quota.

[paulcole]

Nope, doesn't have anything to do with that IMO.

I don't get to pay less at Nordstroms because I don't make as much money as a surgeon. I shop at Gap or a thrift store instead.

Either go to different sites or don't visit those sites at all.

Despite what so many posters here seem to think, it's not a god-given right to read the NYT without looking at ads lol.