Ad tracking: Is anything being done?

Discussion in 'privacy problems' started by ronjor, Apr 2, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nebulus

    Nebulus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Posts:
    1,635
    Location:
    European Union
    @moontan : You see things only in black and white; there are sites/blogs/etc. that are free by choice (their owners have no money gaining interests related to them). There are also sites that have ads as a supplementary income and there are sites that live only through advertising. It's not just "sites with ads" and "sites with a pay-wall", so you are not forced to choose between the two situations only.

    As for me, I'd rather visit sites where there is no payment at all and also with (most) ads blocked from my browser. :)
     
  2. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    9,252
    Maybe that's high. I've just found a couple articles supporting $0.005 per view as the high end.
    < http://www.thesitewizard.com/archive/makemoney.shtml >
    < http://www.wikihow.com/Earn-Money-Through-Google-Adsense >

    But so far, it's on the order of $0.01-$0.02 per view at most. I also get that it depends other factors, so many sites may earn far less than that, or maybe far more.
    Does Wikipedia have ads?

    ;)
     
  3. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    Wikipedia is entirely supported by donation.
    they get enough donations that they don't need to have ads on their site.
    of course, having hundreds of millions of visitors per year makes it easier when it's time for a donation drive.

    anyway, I find even $0.005 too much.
    if you surf 100 different pages a day it ends up costing about 15$ per month.
    I surf a lot more than 100 different pages per day.
    ay $ 0.01 per page we're already at 30$ per month at 100 pages per day.

    the day I have to pay to surf will probably be the last day I surf the web.
    or I will keep it to a strict minimum.

    thanks, but I prefer ads. ;)
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2014
  4. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    I agree with moontan here.

    If I were to "pay for the visit" like a hotel or something then I would most likely browse around a lot less, and discovering new, exciting, useful, great websites would be a thing of the past.

    Paying to have access to the internet is one thing, but paying when accessing a website only to get rid of the ads, no thanks I don't want a premium internet like that.
     
  5. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    9,252
    I guess that I do as well, especially the ones that I never see ;)
     
  6. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    I see them everyday...
    I don't use an ad-blocker
    :D
     
  7. gorhill

    gorhill Guest

    It all comes down to informed consent. Ads don't come alone, it's not just a bit of text or just an mere image, there is a whole lot more attached to them which is not disclosed upfront.
     
  8. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    tnx Ray, but at my age the only thing I worry about is cancer, heart attack or stroke. :eek: lol
     
  9. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Sure, on that I agree. If all they would be was ads and we could forget about the privacy and tracking etc... it would be better.
     
  10. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    That's been the problem all along. The issue isn't the ads themselves as long as they're not "in your face" blunt or funding websites. It's what comes with the ads. When they stop trying to use ads to track and snoop on users, I might start allowing them. I don't see ads becoming less invasive. If anything, they're getting worse. Until that changes, I'll keep blocking. As for those with the websites that rely on them, they could get more proactive on what types of ads they allow and not allowing the tracking components.
     
  11. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    9,252
    There's another "whole lot more": malware. As I understand it, website owners have little if any oversight regarding ads to be displayed. Once an ad that links to a malware-dropping website makes it to ad servers, clients (potentially numerous clients) start displaying it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.