7 ms·

I often forget how browsing the web looks for most people. Can't understand why they put up with it, or do they just think that it's part and parcel of the inte

I often forget how browsing the web looks for most people. Can't understand why they put up with it, or do they just think that it's part and parcel of the internet to have every page look like a slot machine from hell?

chr15m 1mo ago
Yes, in the same way constant software malfunctions and errors are normal and tolerated.
- cpeterso 1mo ago
  Open your browser’s dev tools while loading a website and there’s usually a continuous stream of HTTP and JS errors and warnings. That websites actually work surprises me sometimes, but that’s the pragmatic beauty of the web.
seabrookmx 1mo ago
> every page That's a bit hyperbolic. The areas of the internet I frequent do not have egregious ads (for example, this page). Areas where I really would like good ad-blocking (youtube) are often not covered by these ad blockers. Thankfully Youtube Premium isn't too expensive and solves that issue. Maybe it's better these days but I always found browser extensions (including uBlock) had a pretty big performance hit, so I've always shied away from them (with the exception of a password manager).
- prmoustache 1mo ago
  adblock works well with regular youtube ads (not the one inside the actual content).
  - inigyou 1mo ago
    For the latter, there is sponsorblock.
- username923409 1mo ago
  > Areas where I really would like good ad-blocking (youtube) are often not covered by these ad blockers. uBlock Origin works perfectly fine to block YouTube ads. > I always found browser extensions (including uBlock) had a pretty big performance hit In various places (e.g. the wiki [1]) you can find benchmarks showing that webpages load faster, rather than slower. [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Various-videos-showing-side-by-side-comparison-of-the-load-speed-of-complex-sites https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Various-videos-showin...
- abdullahkhalids 1mo ago
  uBlock causes a huge performance improvement for most regular people's computers.
- beej71 1mo ago
  > Thankfully Youtube Premium isn't too expensive and solves that issue. True, but some of us refuse to give that company money on principle. The minute I can't watch YouTube without ads is the minute I stop watching YouTube. (The creators I follow make way more money off me on Patreon than Google would ever pay them, anyway.) > I always found browser extensions (including uBlock) had a pretty big performance hit I always found that not using uBO was a pretty big performance hit. :)
  - inigyou 1mo ago
    Do you use Invidious?
flomo 1mo ago
[flagged]
iammrpayments 1mo ago
Maybe it’s on purpose to keep people addicted to installing apps
HaloZero 1mo ago
I turned off my adblocker on 404 Media since I wanted to support them, I loaded one new tab in an article and it maxed my CPU at 100% for so long that I paused and had to figure out what was spiking my computer. Immediately turned it off.
- inigyou 1mo ago
  They have a subscription I think. You can pay them actual money.
  - TiredOfLife 1mo ago
    Also known as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering
    - inigyou 1mo ago
      Selling a good or service for money is racketeering, in your opinion?
      - TiredOfLife 1mo ago
        No, but this part is "it maxed my CPU at 100% for so long that I paused and had to figure out what was spiking my computer"
loeg 1mo ago
Chome with uBlock Lite looks, uh, pretty similar to Firefox with uBO.
- x3n0ph3n3 1mo ago
  Try visiting YouTube.
  - lucumo 1mo ago
    You try. uBO Lite blocks ads on YouTube just as well as uBO did.
  - TiredOfLife 1mo ago
    Also on YouTube
  - loeg 1mo ago
    Is this supposed to be a dunk? uBO Lite also blocks YouTube ads.
scared_together 1mo ago
I currently don’t use ad blockers. The only time I used ad blockers was when a previous employer specifically asked me to, when using a company machine. > Can't understand why they put up with it To see which (rare) sites don’t put up a million ads and actually care about the reading experience. A lot of the top-listed sites on HN are small blogs without ads (or in the case of danluu.com or lwn.net - without almost any formatting). daringfireball.net is notable for actually having small, non-intrusive ads that I wouldn’t ever feel the need to block (unless you consider the entire site an ad for Apple but that’s a seperate concern). > do they just think that it's part and parcel of the internet to have every page look like a slot machine from hell? It is integral to the business models of the sites putting up those ads. And if those sites don’t make money then they’ll also be unable to pay writers. Much like herd immunity or financial speculation there will always be “somebody else” to watch the ads and essentially subsidize the ad-blocking audience, but I’d rather not be one of those people, I want my usage to be worth the while for the writers. I am sometimes (rarely) willing to pay for an ad-free experience if I’m a repeat visitor. But more often I’d rather not visit at all if a site is too annoying. Another unfortunate situation is that even if you pay for a subscription, some sites have no ad-free option, such as the New York Times. The big exception is YouTube, where I visit often, am bombarded with ads but also don’t want to pay Google.
- inigyou 1mo ago
  Most of those sites that would shut down without ads are providing negative value and would make the world better if they shut down. Sometimes I make an exception. Sometimes.
  - Tyr42 1mo ago
    Then don't visit? Or realize how bad they are with ads and bounce? They probably track bounce rate as ads load.
    - inigyou 1mo ago
      They're crowding out actually good sites.
mrkeen 1mo ago
I just live in the world where most things are crap. People put up pages because they want to express themselves and/or receive views or engagement. AI kills the first half, and trying to sell my attention kills the second half. I don't stick around for it. I click into "the secret romantic lives of elephants", hit popup hell, then realise I really didn't care. I often can't even remember what I clicked on as soon as I hit back.

chr15m 1mo ago

Yes, in the same way constant software malfunctions and errors are normal and tolerated.

cpeterso 1mo ago
Open your browser’s dev tools while loading a website and there’s usually a continuous stream of HTTP and JS errors and warnings. That websites actually work surprises me sometimes, but that’s the pragmatic beauty of the web.

seabrookmx 1mo ago

> every page That's a bit hyperbolic. The areas of the internet I frequent do not have egregious ads (for example, this page). Areas where I really would like good ad-blocking (youtube) are often not covered by these ad blockers. Thankfully Youtube Premium isn't too expensive and solves that issue. Maybe it's better these days but I always found browser extensions (including uBlock) had a pretty big performance hit, so I've always shied away from them (with the exception of a password manager).

prmoustache 1mo ago
adblock works well with regular youtube ads (not the one inside the actual content).
- inigyou 1mo ago
  For the latter, there is sponsorblock.
username923409 1mo ago
> Areas where I really would like good ad-blocking (youtube) are often not covered by these ad blockers. uBlock Origin works perfectly fine to block YouTube ads. > I always found browser extensions (including uBlock) had a pretty big performance hit In various places (e.g. the wiki [1]) you can find benchmarks showing that webpages load faster, rather than slower. [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Various-videos-showing-side-by-side-comparison-of-the-load-speed-of-complex-sites https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Various-videos-showin...
abdullahkhalids 1mo ago
uBlock causes a huge performance improvement for most regular people's computers.
beej71 1mo ago
> Thankfully Youtube Premium isn't too expensive and solves that issue. True, but some of us refuse to give that company money on principle. The minute I can't watch YouTube without ads is the minute I stop watching YouTube. (The creators I follow make way more money off me on Patreon than Google would ever pay them, anyway.) > I always found browser extensions (including uBlock) had a pretty big performance hit I always found that not using uBO was a pretty big performance hit. :)
- inigyou 1mo ago
  Do you use Invidious?

flomo 1mo ago

[flagged]

iammrpayments 1mo ago

Maybe it’s on purpose to keep people addicted to installing apps

HaloZero 1mo ago

I turned off my adblocker on 404 Media since I wanted to support them, I loaded one new tab in an article and it maxed my CPU at 100% for so long that I paused and had to figure out what was spiking my computer. Immediately turned it off.

inigyou 1mo ago
They have a subscription I think. You can pay them actual money.
- TiredOfLife 1mo ago
  Also known as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeering
  - inigyou 1mo ago
    Selling a good or service for money is racketeering, in your opinion?
    - TiredOfLife 1mo ago
      No, but this part is "it maxed my CPU at 100% for so long that I paused and had to figure out what was spiking my computer"

loeg 1mo ago

Chome with uBlock Lite looks, uh, pretty similar to Firefox with uBO.

x3n0ph3n3 1mo ago
Try visiting YouTube.
- lucumo 1mo ago
  You try. uBO Lite blocks ads on YouTube just as well as uBO did.
- TiredOfLife 1mo ago
  Also on YouTube
- loeg 1mo ago
  Is this supposed to be a dunk? uBO Lite also blocks YouTube ads.

scared_together 1mo ago

I currently don’t use ad blockers. The only time I used ad blockers was when a previous employer specifically asked me to, when using a company machine. > Can't understand why they put up with it To see which (rare) sites don’t put up a million ads and actually care about the reading experience. A lot of the top-listed sites on HN are small blogs without ads (or in the case of danluu.com or lwn.net - without almost any formatting). daringfireball.net is notable for actually having small, non-intrusive ads that I wouldn’t ever feel the need to block (unless you consider the entire site an ad for Apple but that’s a seperate concern). > do they just think that it's part and parcel of the internet to have every page look like a slot machine from hell? It is integral to the business models of the sites putting up those ads. And if those sites don’t make money then they’ll also be unable to pay writers. Much like herd immunity or financial speculation there will always be “somebody else” to watch the ads and essentially subsidize the ad-blocking audience, but I’d rather not be one of those people, I want my usage to be worth the while for the writers. I am sometimes (rarely) willing to pay for an ad-free experience if I’m a repeat visitor. But more often I’d rather not visit at all if a site is too annoying. Another unfortunate situation is that even if you pay for a subscription, some sites have no ad-free option, such as the New York Times. The big exception is YouTube, where I visit often, am bombarded with ads but also don’t want to pay Google.

inigyou 1mo ago
Most of those sites that would shut down without ads are providing negative value and would make the world better if they shut down. Sometimes I make an exception. Sometimes.
- Tyr42 1mo ago
  Then don't visit? Or realize how bad they are with ads and bounce? They probably track bounce rate as ads load.
  - inigyou 1mo ago
    They're crowding out actually good sites.

mrkeen 1mo ago

I just live in the world where most things are crap. People put up pages because they want to express themselves and/or receive views or engagement. AI kills the first half, and trying to sell my attention kills the second half. I don't stick around for it. I click into "the secret romantic lives of elephants", hit popup hell, then realise I really didn't care. I often can't even remember what I clicked on as soon as I hit back.