[ndriscoll]

Are you also okay with sites running crypto miners while they're open without having received your prior consent as a way to monetize? How about if they install a service worker in case you close the tab before doing sufficient mining to pay what they think is fair?

Personally, I run malware blockers by default, so I don't know which sites are trying to send it to me to avoid visiting them. I couldn't tell you whether e.g. the github link in OP has ads. I see some stuff gets blocked, so I guess maybe? I figured they monetize through upselling their enterprise offerings, but I guess it is Microsoft and their OS has ads built in these days, so wouldn't surprise me.

[helpmefindpurp]

What has that got to do with anything?

"I don't mind driving the speed limit"

"BUT ARE YOU ALSO OKAY WITH MURDER???"

[ndriscoll]

Because they both involve non-consensually using your computer for something you didn't want it to do as a form of "payment" you didn't agree to? In fact my point is I didn't see why you would ever consider crypto mining to be murder in this analogy. Crypto mining only uses your computer to do some pure computations and send the other party the result. It does not exfiltrate your private information or stalk you. It does not facilitate scams. It is obviously vastly more ethical than drive-by adware, which uses your computing resources and does those other bad things, but for some reason you don't find people defending crypto miners very often, while you do find them defending ads (I suppose because they participate in adware/spyware delivery somehow, so they're not interested in examining their own actions).

How can you justify it being okay to send drive-by adware and spyware with a requested web page, but you believe it's not okay to use computation as a form of payment without consent?

Personally, I've only ever worked for companies that make money by having our customers pay us for the product or service that I work on, so I've never had to worry about that conflict of interest.