Siu Lun

I had some time and was bored and picked up some interesting news.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/04/firefox_extension_wars/

http://hackademix.net/2009/05/04/dear-adblock-plus-and-noscript-users-dear-mozilla-community/

http://adblockplus.org/blog/attention-noscript-users/

My recommendation: Don’t use either adblock or any web ad-blocking softwares. Websites depends on your support just like how artists depends on your support.

Yes it is true and annoying that some form of ads are intrusive, but if that is so annoying to the point that you cannot stand it, then you automatically stop going to the site. This generates a ‘hint’ for the webmaster that the ads are simply not working and if the webmaster has any brains, he/she will switch to non-intrusive ads.

I don’t use either and apart from the occasionally pop-unders, the sites I visit are rarely intrusive.

Back in 1996, the web is not as big nor as functionally rich as it is today. The world advances with money as a motivator ever since currency was invented, and before that it is about trade and hey today it is still about trade. What do you as a job? Do you not want to get paid to do your job? Can you live without eating and a roof over your head? It just so happens that even before 1996 thank god some people decided to make working on the web their full time job and have since devised ways to generate income.

Simply put, Google, YouTube and many feature and content rich websites you visit today can only exist because of ads. Blocking them you automatically become someone who is just a greedy ass that only care for your own feeling.

I don’t have the time to read into this as it does not interest me but is the fault entirely on the author of NoScript? My understanding is that NoScript is a plugin to not only block ads but primarily security exploits in client-side scripting.

Based on that, NoScript has no obligations to block its own ads and if another plugin is blocking ads on their site which is their bread and butter, they have the right to by-pass it just like any webmaster would.

EasyList seems like what sparked the fire by blocking all scripts related to a domain rather than just the offending part. If I was a user of Adblock Plus I would deem that a breach of trust. As I have signed up for their list trusting they are not ‘censoring’ my internet but simply removing what would normally deem to be unwanted ads.

However then the author of NoScript by not communicating with EasyList to request a removal/omission from the list and simply went straight to action has committed a breach of trust between its users that also uses AdBlock Plus.

What is probably the main argument. The fact that NoScript author changed another plugin’s behaviour without user approval. The fault of this lies with the author of the original software Firefox, to not explicitly clearly define the boundaries and set in programming and/or license/contractual limits, (I haven’t read it, they may have it in some agreement, but in any case) and to approve such plugins based on those limits.

Overall, I believe this to be a lack of maturity, judgement and communications from all parties involved. Does that say something about the plugins? probably.

Communication and negotiations are always first and beyond any actions. This is the most advantages human rule that should always be considered first.

What the author of Adblock Plus is doing and has done, is also debatable however. One has to really question why the f**k has he developed such a plugin to block ads if he is having a dilemma over whether letting people acquire advertising money is a good thing or not? http://adblockplus.org/blog/the-monetization-dilemma. He obviously doesn’t think of this until it affects himself and the people around him. If he has any sense, and realised what he is doing is damaging, then he should quit the development of it.

I thought of something interesting actually just now… the “Terms of Use” agreements that you have to agree to when you sign up for a website and when you go onto a website? What happens, if for example, I have a clause in there that strictly prohibits the blocking of advertisment on the website?

Does that mean I can sue the author of Adblock Plus for damages? Maybe???

Well, in any case, I won’t do such a thing, I also once hated ads before I realised the importance of it. However, I might just put that into websites I develop and kick any users out based on some javascript detection mechanism. From the publisher/service provider’s point of view, they are not asking much of you to simply come and enjoy their content while being served ads. If you block them, you’re essentially getting a free meal, and as far as the publisher’s concerned, you have no right to use the services they’re providing.

Makes sense? Reasonable? I think so.