
Brendan is back to save the Web - ndesaulniers
http://andreasgal.com/2016/01/20/brendan-is-back-to-save-the-web/
======
cballard
The uproar over web clients using adblockers strikes me as "not my problem".
The web works like this:

\- A client sends an HTTP request to a server.

\- The server responds with data

\- The client interprets that data as it is configured to.

The assumption that all clients are standards-conforming web browsers that
will run all JavaScript, use provided CSS, download all resources, etc. is
incorrect. Once that data is out of the server's hands, it has no control. Are
Lynx, curl, wget, etc. somehow evil now? Sending mail to a daemon that
downloads the page and emails it to you?

If you built your business on sending data to an unknown remote client and
expecting it to perform in an exact way, you should probably reconsider your
business model.

~~~
ryandvm
"Not my problem" is a perfect characterization of ad blocking. Of course, so
is recycling or voting or any number of choices you make. It doesn't actually
matter if you do or don't personally use an ad blocker. Just like it doesn't
really matter if _you_ recycle or not.

But if _everyone_ uses an ad blocker, well, things on the Internet are going
to change drastically. At this point, I am in favor of us just getting it over
with, enabling ad blockers everywhere, and making the transition to
micropaying for content (or the less pleasant alternative of submarine
advertising).

I'll totally agree that advertisers and content producers have brought this on
themselves by allowing ever increasingly annoying advertisements on their
sites. Hell, I vacillate between using an ad blocker or not myself.
Nonetheless, I find that people that use an ad blocker and claim they're not
ripping anybody off are being intellectually dishonest. The fact is that
viewing ads and thus generating revenue for the content producer is the
entire, if implicit, point of the free-content arrangement. It's like not
tipping your waitstaff - sure it's voluntary, but you're still ripping someone
off.

~~~
mercer
> It's like not tipping your waitstaff - sure it's voluntary, but you're still
> ripping someone off.

That's a good analogy, precisely because many people (myself included)
consider the concept of tipping as it exists in the US to be absolutely
ridiculous. It's technically voluntary, except it's really mandatory. And this
causes a bunch of issues that seem entirely avoidable to me. Over here in my
part of the world tipping is actually voluntary, as it should be.

If content producers provide content online for free, it should be free. If
they want to get paid, well, they should put a paywall, use microtransactions,
ask for donations, or think of other ways to make money. It's not my job as
consumer to go out of my way to make their business model work. Especially not
if this business model relies on the scummy world of (online) advertising.

Edit: If anything, comparing ad blocking to neglecting to vote or recycle is
intellectually dishonest.

------
mchahn
Who is Brendan? Am I supposed to know him? There is no one named Brendan shown
at the Brave Software page.

And, I don't understand the logic behind paying Brave instead of the original
ad providers. He is still showing ads and taking (at least part of) the money.

~~~
presty
Brendan Eich, former CEO of Mozilla

