But if you were rented a free jetski for the day from someone who had painted some ads on the sides to cover his expenses would you go and tape over the ads before riding? Oh, you would?
To make that comparison more fair, the ads need to be canvas that flapped in the wind, slowing you down occasionally (as ads on websites will do) and every once and a while one would lift up in front of the control panel so you had to clear it out of your view (popups).
If that was the case, I wouldn't rent a jetski from that company.
Now, if that was the only company offering jetskis at that particular location, and there was no paid option available.. well, I'd question whether or not they're owned by YouTube, who I sincerely wish I could pay a few bucks a month to, to get rid of their awful ads.
I'd just get my ideal tape out (waterproof, no residue) and strap those ads down and enjoy my free jetski time. But this comparison will always be flawed, like so many digital/real world ones are today.
I don't see running AdBlock as immoral. If I can change something in my browser to better suit my browsing experience I will, and I feel that's my right. A site can serve up content, but it's my choice as to what portion of that content I choose to view, just as people with PVRs or VCRs can choose to skip ads. Impressions are shit for revenue anyway and I don't think I've ever intentionally clicked on a banner ad so I'm not taking much away from content owners.
I skip sites that have an interstitial ad with a 5 second countdown, so I'm choosing to not ride that jetski.