[mccorrinall]

I‘m using an adblocker too, but I disagree with this reasoning. You don’t need to consent when it’s implied that serving the ads is how the service is generating revenue.

I just find ads annoying, that’s why I use an adblocker. But it‘s not stealing when i’m getting served ads while consuming free content.

[hirako2000]

it's stealing because you aren't explicitly told how the provider is and will be using tactics to take (not ask for) your attention from you, nor an estimated mental cost associated with it. it's like paying for a service with a credit card, without being told how much will be charged. except that this is attention, not money at their disposal.

I recall when YouTube had no ads at all. then placed ad clip somewhere in the video with a very clear yellow bar showing when the ad was coming along with a visual countdown a few seconds before the ad would kick in. then all content would have ad placement and less clear became the yellow indicator.

now? Two ads in row, no indicator, no countdown, and ads randomly kick at the begging at the video and/or randomly throughout. see what's happening there, an incremental increase of even more so difficult to anticipate attention grabs.

we have wagons of top engineers and psychology graduate paid great money to manipulate billions of people into watching ads.

you could say nobody is forcing people to watch YouTube, but given how it subtly increasingly used dark patterns to show up more ads and doing so at each step of the fact they gained more market share all the way to quasi monopoly, it is shocking we still have to explain on HN threads that ads are nepharious, not just a mere way to generate revenue free of charge for everyone.