[johnthewise]

This is a very hostile, almost childish view. Online ads make it possible for many services to be essentially free or even possible in the first place.. I and many others gladly accept being shown ads in return for something we desire. Personalization is great too, It might be as well relevant to me. There is nothing inherently bad in this situation. I've been watching youtube long before I had any money to spare on it.

[immibis]

This is a very hostile, almost childish view. In a great many cases (but not all) the free service with online ads outcompetes one that is provided without any income whatsoever, with someone's voluntary spare resources. By displacing the better service, the one with ads makes the world worse, and if it couldn't exist, the world would be better.

[s1artibartfast]

How do you think they outcompete the superior service? Why do consumers pick the add laden YouTube over add free options?

[immibis]

YouTube is not one of them. Think of recipe sites.

[s1artibartfast]

I agree that recipe sites are a dumpster fire.

Im not sure that I directly attribute that to advertising itself, as much as upstream SEO choices.

I dont mind at all if a recipe includes commission links or ads. I hate that the optimal SEO format is to waste as much of the readers time as possible.

That said, I also see your point in how SE results have an incentive to bury valid non-commercial results.

[JoeAltmaier]

Ad-based online apps are dying? Content providers are fleeing to Patron etc because they actually see any of the money that way.