Please don't block ads! You are hurting content creators' livelihood! You're basically stealing from them by not...

>removes message using the ublock origin element zapper

Fuck you journalists you ain't getting any shekels from me.

Attached: 1568754662674.jpg (800x521, 54K)

They offered it

If they supply it for free, yes.
Ads are not a paywall, they are injected code that I do not appreciate, put your shit behind a paywall if you don't think I am "entitled" to it.

Internet works as request/response
I'm entitled to not request certain sections of a webpage (ie. ads js scripts)
Go make a patreon to distribute your content if you have a problem with this

Jow Forums needs to realize what a menace soiposting is instead of just ignoring it and letting it fester.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU TAKE THE FREE MAGAZINE AND HAVE A ROBOT CUT OUT THE ADS
YOU ARE LITERALLY STEALING

they made the content free so, yes

http is a pull protocol, not push. the client is king. if a content provider doesn't agree, they can fuck off and make their own protocol.

@72835164
>t. journocuck
Based analogy

I haven't searched, but I'd still bet my bottom dime that someone has already tried pushing a protocol (pun intended) for such reasons. Anyway, the users would just disable it and force HTTP, and since the site owners would still need to keep some degree of compatibility until that protocol becomes the new standard, they wouldn't get any profit from it. Unless all of the big guys (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook and Mozilla) just unite and shove a new standard down the users' throats, it would never catch.

>but you're entitled to their content for free, right?
of course not, but they offer it for free on shitty publisher websites so what gives.

if they serve their content for free, why not?

They could have a nearly unblockable ad space by self-hosting a simple image link to their sponsors but no -- these faggots use sketchy third party domains that relay cancerous ads riddled with Javascript executing unknown payloads on my machine.

They get exactly what they deserve: fucking nothing.

No, of course not. But they are not entitled to inject my computer with malicious software either. I would be fine paying every website I visit automatically if was convenient and didn’t require personal info.

Ublock origin sums it up quite succinctly

Attached: Screenshot_20190920-134825.png (2048x866, 432K)

Everything is free on the internet

yeah.

yes, I am the king and they are my peasant slave

I PUT MY CONTENT ON A MACHINE DEDICATED TO CHEAPLY REPLICATING AND DISTRIBUTING INFORMATION AMD NOW THAT CONTENT IS BEING REPLICATED AND DISTRIBUTED. HOW COULD THIS BE HAPPENING?

But.... muh gaymes, muh moovies, muh musick, muh teavi

The ads are the paywall.

>>Please don't block ads! You are hurting content creators' livelihood! You're basically stealing from them by not allowing your browser to download strange JavaScript from sketchy websites!
just makes me want to install more adblockers.

Anyone who reads this post is hereby obligated to send $20 USD to [email protected] via paypal.
Your digital consumption of my creative material (reading this right now) constitutes agreement to this term. On 4channel.org, "Comments are owned by the Poster." (see the bottom of this page)

Pay up sweaty

Attached: smug.jpg (600x800, 75K)

Hey, ever since the olden days the web has supported login-based access for sites.

If you’re going to dump your data all over the place I’ll pick and choose what elements of it I execute and display.

if they use sophisticated computer systems to disseminate their 'content' to as wide an audience as possible, then yes.
i didn't break into their house and make them dance for me at gunpoint.

Excuse me that's a copyrighted Matt Furie meme frog sir and you haven't obtained written permission from the copyright holder to post that. DELET THIS.

Yes.

cuck

How do websites make money off of ads anyway? If no one's going to click the ad I don't see how using an adblocker bleeds the website owner's pockets dry.