People seem to forget the web existed before widespread advertising. Ads are not necessary for all content on the web and, personally, I'd be fine if every last ad supported site on the internet disappeared.
It would actually be a significant improvement, as SEO affiliate blogspam would lose its economic incentive, making it easier to find authentic sites again.
This comment prompted me to think of some website that I rely upon that uses such adware to survive. I can’t think of a single one! Most things I use either dont have ads, ask for donations, or use a paywall/subscription system.
Advertisers are welcome to set up a website where you can watch their ads to earn money, which you can then choose to spend as you choose, whether on food or on (formerly free & ad-supported) services.
YouTube costs money to run and videos cost money to make. If enough people think they’re entitled to use other people’s work without paying them, that doesn’t work and the free video will disappear or get worse. Content moves behind subscription requirements, videos will have a lot more integrated sponsorship ads, and quality will decline as more people will be creating cheap video aimed at easy monetization options.
You said: "But don't yank away from the rest of us the ability to trade ads for useful free services." to which I replied that that noone is forcing you to use it.
You assume for some werid reason, that using adblock is in a way popular... gosh, how to break it to you - outside of the tech bubble people hardly know it's possible to block adds...
You have me confused with someone else. I would also suggest that you consider whether Google would go to the trouble of developing an anti-ad blocker system if they weren’t seeing that become more popular.
I don’t like ads, but I think the only ethical options are posting to avoid them (preferably direct to artists) or watching ads, so I can understand why people want companies to be able to use ads to pay for their costs since the alternative is a lot of content many people won’t see because it won’t be made.
> I don’t like ads, but I think the only ethical options are posting to avoid them (preferably direct to artists) or watching ads
I think that ethical position is weakened by the fact many ads are links to scams and unethical things. You aren't just supporting creators by watching adverts, you're also potentially exposing yourself to bad faith actors.
> People seem to forget the web existed before widespread advertising
They haven't forgotten anything. This claim is so barely true it's not worth considering.
The web both became accessible to ordinary users and gained support for inline images with the release of Win/Mac Mosaic in August 1993. In October 1994 the first banner ad appeared in HotWired, the online version of Wired magazine.
Given that that web went only one year between gaining support for images and people starting to use them for advertising, the idea that the web existed before advertising isn't really true. There have been ads for as long as there has been web content created by paid professionals, as is to be expected.
> I'd be fine if every last ad supported site on the internet disappeared.
You are of course welcome to create a list of websites that don't advertise and then only browse those, although recall that HN obviously wouldn't be usable by you as it is supported by ads. The rest of us will get on with living our lives.