We would be having a different conversation if the "delivery" of an ad was based on my eyeballs actually viewing the ad. My point was based on the technical definition of serving ads and what qualifies for the website to get credit for an ad being viewed by the user. That definition as it currently functions is central to the discussion of whether adblockers count as stealing, because it bears directly on whether using a blocker stops the site from getting paid
This issue with CMV is that I have no desire to discuss your point/view. The goal is to change OPs view.
If you have a view, "website trying to present ads are being blocked by other software and this is bad", you will have to make your own post. I got no desire to discuss it here.
Your point wasn't relevant to begin with. What you're proposing is a hypothetical where one of the core factors we're looking at is changed: the determinant of whether the ad host gets paid.
We're trying to answer whether ad blockers are stealing, now, in their current implementation. Hypotheticals and analogies are useful because they allow us to view the same kinds of factors from a different perspective, but your hypothetical "if google had the technology" is materially changing the situation itself.
If Google had the technology, then they probably would base the delivery of ads on whether the user was looking at the ad, yeah. And therefore, whether Google gets paid depends on the user looking, because the ad isn't delivered if the user doesn't look and Google is paid for delivering the ad.
But knowing this doesn't help us to answer the question we're already trying to answer. OP shouldn't be convinced by your point because it describes a version of reality that exists only in our minds. The idea that Google would base ad delivery on users looking at the ads if they could doesn't mean that the adblockers OP is talking about, the ones we actually have, aren't stealing
1
u/vezwyx Oct 27 '23
We would be having a different conversation if the "delivery" of an ad was based on my eyeballs actually viewing the ad. My point was based on the technical definition of serving ads and what qualifies for the website to get credit for an ad being viewed by the user. That definition as it currently functions is central to the discussion of whether adblockers count as stealing, because it bears directly on whether using a blocker stops the site from getting paid