For better or worse, the business model behind many of these sites rely on the ad revenue to continue existing, and ad blocking only works as long as most people still aren’t doing it.
I fail to see how this is my problem as an end user.
> Don't worry about sustainability. There was life before YouTube and Facebook and there will be life after
Which is it? The point is that this version of the ad-free doesn’t actually exist in the long run. In a discussion about a move away from the “false economy” you highlight via paid subscriptions (presumably not a false economy), it seems odd to say that this already exists while also admitting that it doesn’t/can’t.
If you don't tolerate ads, you could just... not visit the site? Close the tab?
I don't like paying for things, but I've never been in a transaction where I could say "you know what, I don't like the price of this, I'll just take it and give you no money. Deal?"
I am entitled to decide what runs on my computer and how. They only option another party has is whether or not they will provide service to me.
Most ad supported websites aren't like that. They let anybody access the content and only then try to insert ads. That's like trying to close the barn door after the horse has left, and it's a fundamental property of the medium of web publishing.
You can do things to push back against it - put the site behind a username/password and block users who aren't looking at the ads - but this prevents people from discovering the site in the first place.
This is ultimately a mismatch between the desires of the business and the medium they have decided to use, and it's on _them_ to figure that out, not end users.
Just because the medium allows you to do something that doesn't mean it's right to do it. Anyway what do you propose? That every website with ads stops using the web, creates their own non-standards-compliant browser with their own transfer protocol, and tells users to just use that? You can still reverse-engineer and crack it, because everything in a computer is just bits. They've done something similar with smartphone apps and everyone hates that.
Then what instead? If you decided you can just do whatever you want because of the medium, the business will seek methods beyond the medium to get what they want. You'll have to pay for subscription to access any and all content. And guess what, users hate that too! And that still won't stop users from just abusing archive.org and other proxies to copy paste entire paywalled articles to post it on the internet. Blatant copyright infringement. Thinking they're right because it's still just bits in the end.
Honestly the more I think about it the more it feels like users just think they're entitled to free content and it's impossible to satisfy them with anything else.
That's not even a viewer abusing the protocol, that's specifically how the web was designed.
Direct ads from the site you are viewing, yea adblock is great.
Aren't you feeling thirsty and want the cool crisp refreshing taste of an ice cold coca cola right now?
In content ads, and user posts as ads are far more difficult to deal with, but at least they don't track you.
For example, I was watching a "maker" video where they 3d printed some models for the project that were provided by their sponsor for use in the project they were showing you how to make. That type of "advertising" I can support. It doesn't detract from the content or distract, the product is relevant to what you are watching and, as you said, it doesn't track you other than tracking aggregate viewing numbers and how many people skip that section of the video.
Classic examples would be things like Apple paying to have their laptops or computers used as the props in movies. Or a car manufacturer having their vehicles shown. As long as it doesn't take you out of the content and make you feel like you've been interrupted to be advertised to then that's the one and only form of advertising I don't hate.
I guess there's also "opt in" stuff, like the user taking deliberate action to subscribe to a product magazine or newsletter is fine too... emphasis on "opt in" and "deliberate action", however. Nothing gets me to avoid doing business with a company faster than if their "Sign up to your newsletter" checkbox is default checked or, worse, there is no check box and you've been auto signed up and need to unsubscribe. Thanks for punishing me by doing business with you, assholes.
The rest can go away forever and never come back.
Ah! Wayne's World...way (way) ahead of its time.
I really miss those days. There was something special about the internet back then. It felt more like exploring a vast library full of hidden gems rather than being in a mall bombarded with ads and clickbait. Dreaming of a return to that kind of internet feels like wishing for a time machine, but hey, a person can hope, right?