It's interesting that I was quite happy with seeing ads, but a Local World newspaper site (http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/) which I visit relatively often forced me to install something to make the site usable. The ads have made the site almost unusable.
It is the behaviour of advertisers that are making people seek out these blockers. Owners of sites have to realise that their users are desperately trying to engage with them, but they are making the experience SO unpleasant that people are trying to circumvent the owner's attempt to make as much money as possible.
Personally I prefer AdFree[0], it's a very simple utility that blocks ads on the host files level, and automatically updates this file daily. On desktop Chrome, Adblock appears to be a better choice, since they don't selectively show some ads.
11 comments
[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 39.7 ms ] threadhttps://github.com/gorhill/uBlock
They even changed the icon and AFAIK the mu character never meant "micro". However I prefer your interpretation of the mu character.
No one buys "violate TOS" BS.
It is the behaviour of advertisers that are making people seek out these blockers. Owners of sites have to realise that their users are desperately trying to engage with them, but they are making the experience SO unpleasant that people are trying to circumvent the owner's attempt to make as much money as possible.
[0] http://forum.xda-developers.com/nexus-4/themes-apps/adfree-a...
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/adblock-plus/ogkam...