"My main point is that suppressing ads is one thing but to replace ads with others that deprive a site from the CPC revenue is unequivocally wrong. It may be legal but it's wrong."
This is exactly what I feared: a generation who grew up not knowing any better somehow deciding that simply because things were a certain way when they were 15 that it's wrong to change them. It is not.
The web is a communications protocol. It is not a way of life, the meaning of the universe, or written in stone. There are lots of communications protocols.
I can create content (interactive) or not and surface it on the web for others to consume. How, when, or why they consume it is none of my business (aside from perhaps wanting to control access to my content to certain people).
Look at it this way: who is in charge of my consuming your content? If I am blind, would you require me to listen to ads before my text reader started browsing the site? If I had difficulty seeing, would you prevent my browser from scaling the text so that I could see it better even if it ruined your layout? If I were busy, would it be a crime to have my secretary read relevant parts to me over the phone?
It's clear. I, and only I, control how I consume your content once you make it available. Now you might want me to go to some seminar where they'll hard-pressure me to buy timeshares before you turn on access. Fine and dandy. But once the port is open, I might telnet in and read the whole thing one byte at a time for all you care. Content providers are perfectly free to own and control access. They are not free to determine how I consume their content.
You know, there might be a lot more interesting and effective business models for folks interacting on the internet. Simply because we picked one back in 1995 doesn't make it the optimum for all time.
This is exactly what I feared: a generation who grew up not knowing any better somehow deciding that simply because things were a certain way when they were 15 that it's wrong to change them. It is not.
The web is a communications protocol. It is not a way of life, the meaning of the universe, or written in stone. There are lots of communications protocols.
I can create content (interactive) or not and surface it on the web for others to consume. How, when, or why they consume it is none of my business (aside from perhaps wanting to control access to my content to certain people).
Look at it this way: who is in charge of my consuming your content? If I am blind, would you require me to listen to ads before my text reader started browsing the site? If I had difficulty seeing, would you prevent my browser from scaling the text so that I could see it better even if it ruined your layout? If I were busy, would it be a crime to have my secretary read relevant parts to me over the phone?
It's clear. I, and only I, control how I consume your content once you make it available. Now you might want me to go to some seminar where they'll hard-pressure me to buy timeshares before you turn on access. Fine and dandy. But once the port is open, I might telnet in and read the whole thing one byte at a time for all you care. Content providers are perfectly free to own and control access. They are not free to determine how I consume their content.
You know, there might be a lot more interesting and effective business models for folks interacting on the internet. Simply because we picked one back in 1995 doesn't make it the optimum for all time.