[bjustin]

> The tracking done by many ads could be stopped by deleting cookie-headers and using a proxy to serve the ads to hide the real IP from advertisers; but no; they decided that removing the ads completely was a perfectly good idea.

If you mean the ISP should modify any information coming over my connection, no thanks. IP blocking (which I understand is what they are using) is nice and simple.

The blocking should be opt-in rather than opt-out, and I am not opposed to Google blocking everyone on Free because of the ad blocking. But do not advocate intrusive methods that involve an ISP actively modifying data.

[twiceaday]

You'd be hard pressed to find an email service that lets you opt out of their junk mail filter. How is this any different?

[jQueryIsAwesome]

Maybe, just maybe because that spam is not the bussiness model of your email provider.

[twiceaday]

Yes. They are not biased by a conflict of interest so they can offer users exactly what they want.

[jQueryIsAwesome]

Offering everything users want only can be done when they are paying, otherwise they must accept the little things they don't like such as the main income source of all the websites they like to use. It would be like google asking all other ISPs to block this French ISP just because they don't like their business decisions.