On Mon, 29 May 2017 12:40:16 +0100
Richard Kettlewell  wrote:

> Rob Morley  writes:

> > That's an understandable attitude, but short-sighted.  Someone has
> > to pay for content and delivery, you can't expect hobbyists and
> > philanthropists to sustain the current level of internet
> > consumption.
>
> Then perhaps the level will fall.
>
> As far as I can tell, nobody advocating against ad blockers even
> attempts to address the other reason to use them, which is that they
> are security software, mitigating the threat of ad-delivered malware.
>
I wasn't advocating against ad blockers, just responding to the
argument that there's no good reason for advertising on the internet.
It is indeed a security concern when reputable publishers embed third
party advertising over which they have no control and which may contain
malware, particularly of the "drive by" no user idiocy required
variety.  A viable defence may include filters to block known evil
sites rather than all advertising.  I use a few browser plugins which
may accelerate web use or break it, depending on the particular
content - I don't think there's any combination of solutions that will
do only the former and never the latter, although some may come close.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05