NintenDOMG
Member
Ok... wow...
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Pachter talks about AdBlock
- Thread starter DarkoMaledictus
- Start date
Ok... wow...
Infernoabyss
Member
just turned off my ad block for GAF. MY baddd i just dont wanna be swarmed with annoying ads
NintenDOMG
Member
They seems to be to "proud" for that.
Roland1979
Junior Member
Where do you read that he blocks the ads just so they cannot make any money of it and all work put into it has been for nothing . He writes the consequences of his blocking, and that he does not care about the site, but i don't read anywhere that he does it just so all hard work was in vain.
Because every new site you visit is a potential infection vector. You're better off visiting a site, then assessing whether or not it's scummy enough to try and serve hazardous ads. Also, the ad servers themselves occasionally get compromised and serve straight malware in place of ads.
http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/03/28/openx-ads-leading-to-malware-co-blackadvertspro/
http://www.tripwire.com/state-of-se...ver-hack-compromises-thousands-java-exploits/
...etc
What exactly is "bus-shocked"?
Garrus Vakarian
Member
Newest version of chrome has a speaker icon on tabs that are playing sound
GavinUK86
Member
lol, get outta here with that.
junior gonna junior
Roland1979
Junior Member
What is bus-shocked even? Is this some kind of torture or violence? Because if so then that would be sick.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
Show me a million banners at once, I don't care. Put even 5 seconds of video bullshit between me and the content I'm seeking, and I'll circumvent it if possible. Come up with a solution that doesn't take up my time if you want me to abandon AdBlock across the board.
Where do you read that he blocks the ads just so they cannot make any money of it and all work put into it has been for nothing . He writes the consequences of his blocking, and that he does not care about the site, but i don't read anywhere that he does it just so all hard work was in vain.
I didn't get any of it from there but from my mixed opinion on adblock.
I think you mean to say that people who use AdBlock are mostly protecting themselves from intrusive and dangerous ads. A good number of people who use AdBlock also pay subscriptions on other sites to remove ads.
Just because you don't care about what sneaks onto your computer or hijacks your browsing experience doesn't mean others also don't care.
Johnny Cage In The Shower
Member
fixed
What? Opinion is subjective, but that's what makes them have different weight. It's actually silly to called a review with a long, constructed and detailed paragraphs same as "this game suck dick" because both of them are opinion. Good opinion requires effort, and while you can disageee with them, you'll know better why you disagree with the opinion holder than the bad one.
Reviews shouldn't be objective as such thing is impossible. I've to said that review on creative product don't overlap with objectivity in Venn diagram. what they should is fair and not extremely bias.
Roland1979
Junior Member
I even quoted you. You claim he "publicly says that he does it so the hard work that they put in is worthless." It's your writing. You just thought you heard that in the video and jumped to conclusions.
advertisers are worse scum than the people trying to avoid ads.
It becomes very very murky, when advertisers force themselves into computers with malicious software, datamining, data monitoring... its as bad as Game Developers who make F2P games for the soul purpose of making money. (im not talking about developers who make games to make money for a living, stick with me here,... im talking about developers who dont care about games, or customers, typically cloning the most popular games out there at the moment, and sucking money any way possible.)
I get that websites need revenue. Thats fine, and a LOT of sites do it well (offer ad-less subscriptions, or at the very least, make the ads as least invasive as possible...
But Pach cant sit there and tell me that because a person doesnt want random shit plastered on their screen, they are scum. Advertisers are definitely worse. (can you imagine the people who come up with advertising tactics... like kinect room-scanning type stuff...? those people are terrible.)
It becomes very very murky, when advertisers force themselves into computers with malicious software, datamining, data monitoring... its as bad as Game Developers who make F2P games for the soul purpose of making money. (im not talking about developers who make games to make money for a living, stick with me here,... im talking about developers who dont care about games, or customers, typically cloning the most popular games out there at the moment, and sucking money any way possible.)
I get that websites need revenue. Thats fine, and a LOT of sites do it well (offer ad-less subscriptions, or at the very least, make the ads as least invasive as possible...
But Pach cant sit there and tell me that because a person doesnt want random shit plastered on their screen, they are scum. Advertisers are definitely worse. (can you imagine the people who come up with advertising tactics... like kinect room-scanning type stuff...? those people are terrible.)
People like you need to consider both moral and practical implications.
BTW mods will ban anyone who admits to games piracy, past or present.
Ads just shouldn't be intrusive and abrasive, those are my only conditions for using a site. The GAF banner for some darts thing I just saw couldn't possibly irritate me, but some shitty TitanFall ad that slides around the screen with noises and horrible flash that dogs performance is completely unacceptable in terms of user experience. Sites need to make money, and that's totally fine, but I'd prefer they do it without making it grossly unpleasant to use in the process.
Wolfe
Member
Great attitude.
Aquamarine
Member
Why is it our responsibility to contribute to their flawed business model if we don't respect them enough to whitelist them?
Johnny Cage In The Shower
Member
I wonder how many more GT regulars (members) weren't even aware of Ad Block, but now they not only know about it but have it installed and use it on GT?
I think because I can just run ad block and not deal with it at all. I click a lot of links from twitter and that way I don't have to know ahead of time what I am getting in to. Also, one of the most annoying things is clicking to see a trailer for a movie, game, or whatever, and having an ad first. It's a weird business model since a trailer is already an ad itself.
So people not wanting to get viruses are scum?
I think it is far more the people that are making threats of violence!
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
You can't be serious, hahahahaha.
TheSpaceBetween
Member
Wow, Pachter is so clueless it truly never ceases to amaze me. He has virtually no ability to see anything but his own opinion. As others have said, Jim Sterling's take on this is infinitely more intelligent and professional.
If you hold the site in such contempt, why go to it?
Infernal Monkey
Member
What the heck is 'bus-shocked'? Google search brings up a Spongebob GIF and a news story about some pedophile football coach as the first two results.
Certain sites like gaf, gametrailers and the escapist (a few examples) adblock is disabled... but keep in mind there are many sites where having noscript/adblock disabled is a security issue. Rogue ads can inject/exploit vulnerabilities and infect your computer. For quite awhile iframe injections would infect you (and I think still can).
Shit sucks. Adblock for potentially illegitimate sites for sure. Just pointing out there are legitimate reasons to use adblock.
Shit sucks. Adblock for potentially illegitimate sites for sure. Just pointing out there are legitimate reasons to use adblock.
Gentleman Jack
Member
old joke from the wow shaman forums after a community manager had a meltdown and hoped someone's mom would get hit by a bus.
Adblockers are useful tools, but if you blanket block all advertising for content that you regularly consume, you're being kind of a dick.
CambriaRising
Member
Oh you are just a treat.
Infernal Monkey
Member
Ah! Thanks for clearing that up.
After watching some of his videos, I think I might start following this guy. Pachter, on the other hand, really didn't come off as professional. I don't think I will be watching any of his stuff after this.
I don't think that using adblock automatically makes you an immoral asshole. In fact, for certain cases, using it may be safer than not. The thing I found baffling was that many users admit to having sites that they visit frequently, yet don't seem to want to give anything back in return. Ads are an essential ingredient to keeping the internet free. Whats the alternative, should every site suddenly start a subscription based service? Would you be fine paying for access to multiple sites that you visit? Without ads, the internet would suck, and users directly contribute to making it shittier by using adblock indiscriminately. I get that some ads are horrible and may even be dangerous, so i'm not saying adblock is without use, but its ridiculous to use adblock because of a 15 second video or a banner ad. Some people have convinced themselves that viewing content for free by bypassing a monetization scheme is fine so long as its not explicitly illegal, and there is nothing anyone could say to convince them otherwise.
MesserWolf
Member
Come on ....
Websites, like many other businesses, can present you with advertisings ( which means that they try to sell you something), they may also choose to make ads their main source of revenues, however, you have absolutely no obligation whatsoever of actually watching them, clicking them or buy the advertised product. Just like you are not obliged to read all the posters on the underground / train/ bus, but you can sleep peacefully despite the fact that without those ads the tickets would be more expensive for you.
As most of these ads pay by the click, do you also constantly click on all of them as otherwise it would be theft ?
One thing is to willingly support certain websites, and another is to believe that there is some kind of moral obligation to do so.
Ads can be a win win for customers and content providers, but it remains that they are a way to try to squeeze value out of you ( and usually increasingly mor) and that they can be annoying in number, type and presentation.
It is a balance: you try to impose as many ads as you can on me, and I tolerate them until they become too annoying and then I either change site or I stop looking at them (== ad block). Some website got the balance right, some do not, and I am very very happy I can choose to block them in that case. At the end of the day, it gives you back some kind of negotiation power.
The problem with ads is that they get more and more obnoxious and intrusive.
I have mostly stopped going to gametrailers and other similar sites because they ask me to sit through 30 seconds of ads before getting to the content.
And then the player stalls half way through, you refresh and boom 30 seconds of ads again.
It is just too much. Same with YouTube. 30 seconds is forever in internet time.
Aint no one got time for that shit.
I have mostly stopped going to gametrailers and other similar sites because they ask me to sit through 30 seconds of ads before getting to the content.
And then the player stalls half way through, you refresh and boom 30 seconds of ads again.
It is just too much. Same with YouTube. 30 seconds is forever in internet time.
Aint no one got time for that shit.
Yeah, I don't like ads so I avoid them. I skip commercials too (or mute or leave the room, or do something else), and won't download anything on phones that subsidizes itself with ads instead of just letting me pay for it. I imagine enough people still just watch the ads since there really isn't any innovation in revenue models, so I take that as sites being okay with me avoiding them. There are a few forums that I can buy my way out of ads for like $10, and I do that. Sometimes if my ad blocker can't skip by the ads on videos, I just end up closing the site, as it probably wasn't that important anyway.
Well, Pach might have went off on the guy. However, I think the guy that wrote in to him had a nasty attitude. So I can totally understand why Pach would reply in such a nasty tone to the guy. Also, he makes fair points. I can't stand ads. But at the same time, I shouldn't expect to get things for free. So I can either pay to view the website/(or watch the TV show), or I can watch ads, and not pay a cent.
If there wasn't ads, then how do we expect these things to run? They can't just run for free. My only issue is when the ads are intrusive (pop up ads, or they obscure the entire site). So for me, I would argue it's on the site/ad companies to start implementing ads that acceptable. Still, you know there will be a fair amount of people that will never allow ads.
Yeah this is my issue with how he approaches the discussion. I can understand why he's mad at THIS guy specifically (the guy that wrote in). But when he starts going on a rant about it in general, he's not really being fair. And like I said, I think companies should be responsible for providing safe ads that aren't intrusive. A big reason people turn to ad block, is because they kept pushing the ad campaigns to unreasonable levels. So at a certain point, it's on these companies to do a better job at providing content that people want to pay for (or ie. allow ads to run for).
EDIT: Also I love Kyle Bosman. But I have to say, I think he's doing a questionable job as producer for Pachter. I feel like he strokes Pachters ego too much. And on top of that, I don't think he's doing a good job with selecting the questions and moving the show along. Maybe I'm being too harsh (because I don't know exactly what his job is as a producer). But I've noticed Pachter's show has been shaky since he took over. Again, I really like Bosman. So I hate to be harsh, but just a thought.
If there wasn't ads, then how do we expect these things to run? They can't just run for free. My only issue is when the ads are intrusive (pop up ads, or they obscure the entire site). So for me, I would argue it's on the site/ad companies to start implementing ads that acceptable. Still, you know there will be a fair amount of people that will never allow ads.
Yeah this is my issue with how he approaches the discussion. I can understand why he's mad at THIS guy specifically (the guy that wrote in). But when he starts going on a rant about it in general, he's not really being fair. And like I said, I think companies should be responsible for providing safe ads that aren't intrusive. A big reason people turn to ad block, is because they kept pushing the ad campaigns to unreasonable levels. So at a certain point, it's on these companies to do a better job at providing content that people want to pay for (or ie. allow ads to run for).
EDIT: Also I love Kyle Bosman. But I have to say, I think he's doing a questionable job as producer for Pachter. I feel like he strokes Pachters ego too much. And on top of that, I don't think he's doing a good job with selecting the questions and moving the show along. Maybe I'm being too harsh (because I don't know exactly what his job is as a producer). But I've noticed Pachter's show has been shaky since he took over. Again, I really like Bosman. So I hate to be harsh, but just a thought.
Sterling is hardly what I'd call "professional" either, at least in the sense that you mean it. His show is full of bad language and occasionally juvenille humor. I don't think he's ever directly insulted a viewer, but he's hardly hesitant to call the subjects of his rants "scumbags". Even in the AdBlock video he basically calls his angry viewer an entitled "shitbat," and says that he should fuck off. But he does it in a more elegant and roundabout way than Pachter does here.
Pachter is generally far more genial than Sterling. This episode is a relatively uncharacteristic outburst. A lot of times Pachter gets some seriously stupid-ass questions and treats them with a level of seriousness that they don't deserve.
Don't even go to their site and view their content, period.
So what demographic % of adblock users actually pay subscription? What is "good number"?
So far I have been using chrome with just a virus scanner, Google has also been vigilant about malware warnings.
In the end, these are poster justifications but not the real reason. The main reason is simply to bypass ad annoyance and not contribute to the business model of delivering free content.
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
saying ", period." is annoying and just makes you look like an asshole.
I'll adblock any site that doesn't make ads non-intrusive like GAF does, I really appreciate this community and I even click the ads every now and then to help out.
Different kinds of shows. Pachter is supposed to be answering fan questions, whereas Sterling does scripted editorial pieces. So Pachters outburst comes off more offensive as he's directly going off on a reader. So while Sterling might use foul language and crude humor from time to time, they still come off (generally) as well presented pieces. Even if you don't agree.
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
You probably bitch when things go behind a paywall.