I've been informed that adblock plus sort of sucks now. If you're looking for one, go for UBlock Origin.
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
1231 points (95.2% liked)
memes
10393 readers
1834 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd be really curious how much my internet use "costs" to advertisers and if I could/would pay that amount instead.
Like, the advertiser paid $0.0005 to serve that ad to me so I'll just pay that amount directly to the site and not be served the ad. Just incorporate it into my internet bill and I'd pay just like I do for power or gas. And would my willingness to not see ads make me more or less valuable to advertisers and affect the math?
I don't like the subscription model as it seems like the price point isn't based on actual cost at all and like they're double-dipping by still selling my info. Charge me the actual cost plus a reasonable profit margin of 10%-20%. How much would that be? Is advertising really so valuable that I wouldn't be willing to pay that amount? If so, are advertisers overselling the efficacy of their product?
Or we could just block the ads and tell them to fuck off.
Or they could just block you and tell you to fuck off