“Ads keep our content free to you to enjoy, please allow ads.”
** Allowing ads to the site **
LOL!! You fell for it!!! You need to subscribe too, LOL!
You must log in or register to comment.
I’ve said it before, but news companies and magazines like this deserve some of the blame for the proliferation of “fake news.” Monetary needs or not, when they lock legitimate reporting behind paywalls that simply guarantees people are going to get their news from “free” sources instead.
I understand the need for revenue, but another solution should have been found that didn’t effectively turn facts and reality into premium subscription content.
It should be pretty simple: real news that affect people’s lives should always be free, since that’s a journalist’s duty to society.
Entertainment, sports, and the other stuff can be behind a paywall because people do pay for stuff like that. Plus, sensationalized stories about celebrities to get views would be far less damaging to society than sensationalized (often fake) stories about politicians to get the same views.
100% this.
It says Continue without disabling on the bottom of that banner, which if you do, it gives you access to the whole site without hassling you again. At least it does on my end with Firefox.
Obviously it’s bullshit to constantly badger you, but it doesn’t currently restrict access to anything.
I mean back in the olden days I would pay for a newspaper, for example, because the ads were USEFUL. Every week there’d be a motors section where all the dealers would advertise their deals on a full page each, and punters would try and sell their clapped-out cars in the classifieds. Then once a week it was the day for job vacacies, another day was property. Gradually the businesses started getting websites and stopped advertising in papers - which in turn got thinner and less useful. They had their own websites but most never worked out how to make money from them. People could get their news on TV, newspapers were only useful for starting fires with.
Magazines have followed a similar pattern I guess. It’s a bit of a death spiral. Sad, but there you go. The online ads are just garbage, they’re not useful at all. I don’t want them, I don’t want anything they’re trying to sell.
my town has one of those ad magazines that comes out every month with a small calendar of civic events. there’s a 35% off coupon to the weed store in there every month. I’ll take the entire book of ads for that discount.
You want me to PAY for that?
At least that proves a human wrote it
🙃
It doesn’t though. Because AI was trained on human data, it contains and can replicate human errors. Its extremely rare yes, especially compared to real human output, but I have personally seen ai make misspellings and other human-like errors in its output.
But actual typos? I might see it using the wrong word because people keep using it (can’t think of a good example right now but like their/there) but “Minneosta” isn’t a word at all. A simple spell check would catch that.
Yes, actual typos. LLMs don’t perform spell checks. Yes, they can “spell check” your inputs, but that isn’t what is actually happening. It’s all predictive text, and if they’ve learned to predict that the appropriate word in this context in 98% of cases is Minnesota, but since their dataset includes real human errors, it’s not unrealistic that then the LLM could also conclude that the appropriate word in 2% of cases is “Minneosta” instead, which means given enough output variables the misspelling will appear.
Again, I have personally had LLMs generate output with typos, not just factual errors.
Edit: cleaned up a couple very human typos
Excellent point. Huh.
Cough cough archive.ph
I just got a new router which actually got asgard baked into it and honestly it’s disgusting how many trackers there are.
see, I don’t negotiate with terrorists, so I use PopUpOFF and Bypass Paywalls Clean. Also AdNauseam, TrackMeNot, CanvasBlocker, and SponsorBlock to round out the “fuck you, fuck your ads, and fuck your tracking” suite.
Hostile consumer practices becoming ubiquitous? Become a hostile consumer.
If you don’t pay you’re not the consumer. Why wouldn’t they be hostile to you?
Calling a news site terrorist for asking for payment for the articles they write in the current political landscape sounds so… first-world-problems.
It was probably an entertaining exaggeration, but I don’t like how the term is being diluted by overuse. If a mosquito bites me, it’s a terrorist. Got a stone in your shoe? Believe it or not: Terrorist.
The term has serious legal consequences in many countries, therefore we should make sure people don’t forget what its true meaning is.
Running malware on someone else’s computer does not exactly make you the good one.
Big reach from running ads to it being malware
I didn’t say ads can’t contain malware, but it’s a bit of a “(some) internet malware is ads, but not all ads are malware” scenario, it’s very dependent on who they get the ads from and how tight those ads get reviewed. Broad statements like that are just ignorant, and I say that as someone who uses an adblock on all of their devices.
“…and how tight those ads get reviewed”
Websites that serve ads don’t review them ESPECIALLY if those ads are coming from third parties.
I know dummy, I meant the ad supplying platforms reviewing them
(some) internet malware is ads, but not all ads are malware
That’s backwards. (Most) ads are malware, but not all malware is ads.
The majority of ads are, at best, dangerous and, at worst, actively malicious. The ad networks don’t care to review them because they make money either way.
The overwhelming majority of ads are malware. Which is why I block aggressively and refuse to budge on that.
*the articles they copied somewhere else
Saying that based on…?
Based on the fact that I haven’t lived under a rock for the last 10-20 years. The more the internet expanded the more sources there were to copy from and since then it has increased greatly. Sometimes you only need to search the headline and you’ll find several “sources” < I mean in general and not related to the article
That’s just arguing in bad faith, unless you can at least demonstrate that this particular journal has copied their articles in the past.
Even if you were to entertain that thought however it doesn’t make them any more guilty of “terrorism” like op called them
I did not respond to the OP’s statement. I merely corrected your statement, as an extremely large number of articles are copied from somewhere these days. Which is absolutely no secret. International articles that are then chased through a translator and then published without being read. including nonsense from the translator.
The terrorizing then takes place later with copyrights etc. between publishers and the public. Yes, DRM is already terrorizing
This is when 12ft.io comes in handy or if that doesn’t seem to work, I just ignore whatever they were trying to get me to read. No news article is ever that important.
or archive.is
Another option that usually works is just disabling JavaScript for that site.
Thats what 12ft does. Its just a script blocking proxy.
If I land on a site using Admiral AAB I do two things…
- update my blocklists with the new AAB servers
- return to the search engine and pick another site
I really, really dislike Admiral AAB. Why would you want to evade a user’s adblocker just to ask them to switch it off? I will keep it on thank you very much!
