Comments on: whyfirefoxisblocked: adorable muppets

By: we assume that you said yes ~ numerodix blog

we assume that you said yes ~ numerodix blog — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 17:08:48 +0000

[...] I don’t know where Al Gore is, but there is a highly Inconvenient Truth here. And it is this: publishers are working from the assumption that the viewer has implicitly agreed to make them money without ever agreeing to it. This is why the Ars Technica article has to do that weird dance around the issue where they’re not calling you a cheat, but then they are, but then they’re not etc. Because if they did just come out and say it, they couldn’t look themselves in the mirror, because they have more self respect than certain muppets. [...]

By: Joel Wideman

Joel Wideman — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:48:22 +0000

Delicious irony: your google ads are for pop-up blockers.

By: anon

anon — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 04:13:05 +0000

It’s a JOKE, people…
They explain it in the ‘ABOUT’ section. Jeez…
http://whyfirefoxisblocked.wordpress.com/about/

By: Solanum Tuberosum

Solanum Tuberosum — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:56:24 +0000

Actually, if you intend to take a looksy around the WWW, you should be equipped with 3 things: AdBlock Plus, User Agent Switcher, in the event that a website checks your browser, and IE tab, in case you can’t seem to fool the goddamn website, and you really really want to check out that webcomic.

By: Spleen

Spleen — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 10:45:41 +0000

You know the google ad feature? How it advertises things similar to what’s on the page? Yeah, I visited the lads site and Firefox is mentioned so many times it advertises it with GoogleAds! Brilliant! Well, I thought so.

Accessed the site with Firefox too.

By: Perculti

Perculti — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:26:23 +0000

Being a fellow editor of web pages i do believe that adding AdBlock to your arsenal is a MUST! Plus, I really hate to say it, but I ran AOL and IE for many years and felt happy with the services i got till i tried Firefox. There is just no comparison, Firefox doesn’t force feed you any of those stupid extras like the 500th popup blocker/spam blocker/other anoying crap that takes time out of my valuable surfing time. IF I WANT IT I’LL JUST GO GET IT!!!!!!!! Thank you writer for being one of the many lights leading us away from the crap on the mainstream!

By: darklooshkin

darklooshkin — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:46:42 +0000

it’s funny, when the window popped up saying that it was blocking firefox, i switched over to microsoft internet explorer to see if i could access the site using that. guess what: the damn thing blocks IE as well! don’t believe me? try it out!

plus, what’s their problem anyway? they almost sound like the kind of companies who hate TiVo for exactly the same reason. pop-ups are the spam of internet sites and should not consume as much bandwidth as they do. so, instead of whining about effective pop-up blockers, how about working on the medium you are using? i mean, are you sure that inducing an epilepsy in a possible consumer is the absolute best idea you can come up with to sell him-her a penis enlarger? seriously, it is the worst form of advertising bar spam and carpet fire-sale adverts, and then not by much…

By: Some Random Blog » Article » Advertisers vs. Consumers and the future of online advertising.

Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:31:41 +0000

[...] Martin Matusiak argues in his Adorable Muppets blog that since Firefox users are a small percentage of online traffic, and AdBlock users are a percentage of that small percentage, that there isn’t actually a problem with a volume of people “stealing” content in the first place. On the O’Reilly blog is the point that that of the +/-2.5% of web users who actually click on adverts, it’s very unlikely that many of them are amongst those who have installed AdBlock. [...]

By: numerodix

numerodix — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:43:45 +0000

“If TV programming is sponsored, nobody should be lining the pockets of the despicable cable companies. I, for one, do not.”

I guess the argument could be made that cable tv is paid for in part by the customer and in part by the advertiser. I don’t know if that’s the case, but it would make sense.

By: Chaotess

Chaotess — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 20:12:17 +0000

Any browser can be tweaked to disallow what is displayed on it. Also, why is it that people have to pay big bucks for cable TV (just for reception in many cases), when these paying customers are subjected to marketing efforts? If TV programming is sponsored, nobody should be lining the pockets of the despicable cable companies. I, for one, do not.