This thread is to discuss the article titled:
So, you want to avoid advertising?

Let me disagree.

Every ad costs bandwidth, distracts you from the content you are after, costing you money, time and attention span.

There is no such thing as a good ad.

Ads, scams and frauds use the same entry. Blocking them indiscriminately removes the nuisance together with the dangerous, so what? Lest the difference between an ad and a scam is only gradual, they all want your money one way or the other. You should be able to browse the net without getting hit into the face that someone wants to sell something to you each and every split second, shouldn't you?

Hosting gets so cheap these days that small range webmasters can easily afford to skip them, larger ones can employ other means of funding.

By not appearing on their statistics you also don't appear on their data mining facilities and get some privacy back. Perhaps you even attract less spam and that would be worth it alone.

I am so happy with Linux because if I install a printer driver or a virus scanner, it does not modify my PC to a corporate branded gadget.

I am so happy with FOSS because if I install some software, it does not need to pollute my system with some browser toolbars that are actually spyware pretending to be desktop search engines.

So, modifying the instructions you gave in your excellent article, let me add my own:

Take it personally.
Understand each ad as an attack on your privacy.
Handle each ad as a personal insult.
Block them all.
Put them out of business.
Take back the web.
Don't care about emptying webmasters pockets. This revenue costs too much. If you liked someone, donate.
Don't use freeware that comes bundled with adware or spyware, be it installable or browseable.

Alright

Quite true. A slightly-less-tolerant blog post of mine on the topic of adblocking actually got linked from the AdBlock Plus website a while ago on pretty much that topic.

But this is where I disagree.

There are websites where you can go to download TV adverts - and they're very popular. Why? Because some TV adverts are genuinely funny/entertaining enough that people *want* to see them, enough so that they'll hunt them down and download them in order to do so. (My favourite example being this one)

And there are a few - just a few - adverts that I either don't mind, or positively enjoy seeing. Google's adverts when I do a search are often relevant enough that I click on them because they're actually more useful than most of the search results pages.

The UserFriendly comic occasionally has advertising drives to get people to upgrade to Paid Subscription - and although I have such a sub, I don't use the ad-free version of the page: The adverts take the form of an alternative strip, which is replaced by the real one after 30 seconds. That's like getting two strips in one day - I *benefit* from UF advertising.

Any advert that's annoying, intrusive, deceptive, or in any way undesireable gets adblocked mercilessly and permanently. But blocking the few types of advert that are actually enjoyable, useful, or otherwise worth seeing? No, such adverts should be encouraged, not blocked indiscriminately. Advertising online isn't going to go away, believing otherwise is wishful thinking.

So doing what we can to make sure that the ads are helpful, entertaining, or in some way worth seeing, rather than annoying, intrusive, or distracting, can only be to our benefit. I'd rather advertisers were busy thinking up new ways to make my web experience better, than be busy thinking up new ways to bypass my popup blocker.