>It's so frustrating seeing people talk about ad blocking as some ethical issue.
How often do you hear your family talk about the ethical implications about ad blocking? What I mean is, how often do people with no dog in the fight talk about ad blocking ethics? For me, never. Of course websites that depend on advertising dollars are going to complain about the public blocking their advertising dollars.
Do you not have to 'accept' the TOS prior to using a Blizzard bot? I am not told to accept (or even view) the Business Insider's TOS prior to use.
IANAL, both it's obvious that parties must agree for a contract to be valid. It can not be implied. I can not hang a mortgage contract on my wall in the bank and bypass the need for individual acceptance.
This is me. What's the reason behind this? Is this because it gives me the "I'm doing something productive" feeling while simultaneously doing nothing productive?
1. This is not cash in a bank.
2. Innovation is a requirement not an option.
3. Innovator's Dilemma completely contradicts the point you attempt to make in #2.
I agree. But, as a potential shareholder, let's point out the elephant in the room: Yahoo is not doing good. What is being done about that? If all you do is emphasize the positives, I have to wonder if you're taking the bad seriously.
How often do you hear your family talk about the ethical implications about ad blocking? What I mean is, how often do people with no dog in the fight talk about ad blocking ethics? For me, never. Of course websites that depend on advertising dollars are going to complain about the public blocking their advertising dollars.