| > Why is it fair to block ads, but unfair to block visitors? If you scanned, tracked, and dealt information about visitors to your home, visitors would cease to visit or would defend themselves. If you did this scanning and tracking as a naive proxy, it would be worse. If I visit your home, you have an interest in receiving me and/or I have an interest in visiting you. The WWW was designed for visiting and sharing. The advertising surveillance system has become an evil economic anti-pattern that the publishers (in most cases) do not understand and do not control. It is not like printed publicity in its effect. I can choose to read a page or skip it without further risk to me, and my purchase of the publication supported its workers. If we visit a Web site explicitly (not through re-direct), it is a sign that we are interested in the content. If the site inflicts an unwanted data collection on visitors, people will choose to defend themselves. In the end, you will discourage people from visiting. This may not be what you want. It certainly is not what T Berners-Lee envisaged. |
That's my point. Expecting these users to pay a fee is a pipe dream. It's their sport to get everything they can for free. They have no empathy for content creators.