1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://git.sr.ht/~seirdy/seirdy.one synced 2024-11-10 00:12:09 +00:00
seirdy.one/content/notes/adblocking-with-a-clear-conscience.md
2023-08-22 01:52:26 -07:00

1.6 KiB

title date replyURI replyTitle replyType replyAuthor replyAuthorURI syndicatedCopies
Adblocking with a clear conscience 2023-08-22T01:43:42-07:00 https://nzsocial.net/@tinfoilhat/110931692229194778 do you pay to remove ads, or continue to view content while breaking the agreement with ad blocking SocialMediaPosting tinfoilhat https://nzsocial.net/@tinfoilhat
title url
The Fediverse https://pleroma.envs.net/notice/AYz2rpF6pH4G8dzWGO
title url
jstpst https://www.jstpst.net/f/just_post/8640/adblocking-with-a-clear-conscience

There is no such agreement on the web:

  • On the users's end, we don't have advance notice that a link destination will contain malware (such as ads). The page has already downloaded; the content is already on our device before we agreed to anything. We were handed the goods and only told they had a price after leaving the store.
  • On a site owner's end, Terms of Service should not a shield to enable discrimination. ToS that discriminate against marginalized groups have historically warranted civil disobedience and lawsuits ending in legal reform that outlawed such practices; why should ToS discriminating against neurodivergent users be any different?

I have ADHD and overstimulation sensitivity. Requiring me to view ads is discriminatory. So yes, I would violate the fuck out of such a ToS with a clearer conscience than the site owners, and side with the plaintiffs should the site ever face an accessibility lawsuit.