[jsheard]

> But an AI agent using a website to do something for a user is not substantially different than any other application doing the same.

If the website is ad-supported then it is substantially different - one produces ad impressions and the other doesn't. Adblocking isn't unique to AI agents of course but I can see why site owners wouldn't want to normalize a new means of accessing their content which will inherently never give them any revenue in return.

[lolinder]

I don't believe that companies have the right to say that my user agent must run their ads. They can politely request that it does and I can tell my agent whether to show them or not.

[jsheard]

True, but by the same measure your user agent can politely request a webpage and the server has the right to say 403 Forbidden. Nobody is required to play by the other parties rules here.

[lolinder]

Exactly. The trouble is that companies want the benefits of being on the open web without the trade-offs. They're more than welcome to turn me down entirely, but they don't do that because that would have undesirable knock-on effects. So instead they try to make it sound like I have a moral obligation to render their ads.