?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Uh huh. Let me know how that works out.

From slashdot:: ""Google — the world's largest online ad broker — sees no reason to worry about the addition of ad-blocking extensions to its Chrome browser. Online advertisers will ensure their ads aren't too annoying, the company says, and netizens will ultimately realize that online advertising is a good thing.""   Is that the same way we realized that we WANT to pay for music every time we change media, and we WANT to have our Internet access cut off if we're accused of filesharing?  If that was going to happen, wouldn't it sort of happened by now, and people wouldn't be creating the ad-blocker extensions? Someone's reading their own press releases a little too much.

Comments

( 2 comments — Leave a comment )
carlfoxmarten
Dec. 17th, 2009 09:13 pm (UTC)
I guess their theory is that the more annoying the ad, the more people will block it, thereby dropping the amount of possible revenue achieved in that manner, as opposed to relatively innocuous ads (similar to the ones in the GMail interface).
(the "intellitext" ads that add links to "appropriate" words is in one of the more annoying categories, so I hope to God that they die a quick and painful death)
ccdesan
Dec. 17th, 2009 10:56 pm (UTC)
>Online advertisers will ensure their ads aren't too annoying

The core of that statement is Wrong On So Many Levels that I can't begin to elaborate upon the depth of the rot which infects humanity. This is like expecting Lawyers to be Ethical, Congressmen to be Altruistic, Corporations to be Compassionate,or Rattlesnakes not to Bite.

*thermonuclear shudder*

( 2 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

November 2015
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Keri Maijala