No real offence intended but, to me it seems obvious that your
   arguments are logically flawed and I'm not going to waste my time, but
   I will say your contrarianism is actually kinda entertaining in a
   sadistic sort of way. I really am only expressing my opinions, I could
   be wrong, but I really don't think I am, really it's just a matter of
   perspective. There are givers and there are takers in this world, and
   when there are more givers than takers the world becomes a better
   place. However the trend, which indeed I assume you are a good example
   of, for people these days seems to be towards takers and zero-sum
   minded people. Which is something I hope to discourage. This all of
   course is philosophical and not technical, I have a preference for
   discussing real technical matters in regards to crypto,
   cryptocurrencies, algorithm ideas, privacy assurance, and steganography
   (favorite cipher), and of course sharing of industry related news and
   insights. I hope you all have a great day. :-)

   Joseph Frazier
   On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 5:47 PM, juan <[1]juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:

     On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 16:40:40 -0600
     Joseph Frazier <[2]j0zffrazier@gmail.com> wrote:
     > >
     > >
     > > > Personally, I
     > > > consider ad-blocking a form of theft,
     > >
     > >         priceless. You might have not noticed but people are
     > > supposed to own their computers. So the actual theft is done by
     the
     > > ad publishers who are criminally accessing hardware they do not
     > >         own. That's especially blatant in the case of the tons
     of
     > >         javashit tracking malware they run on the computers of
     their
     > >         victims.
     > >
     >
     > Sure, it's their computer, but they chose to visit a site which is
     not
     > theirs,
             so? If you don't want your site 'visited' then don't make it
             public. This is a variation of a non-argument for
     'intellectual
             property'. if you don't want 'your' ideas 'stolen' then keep
             them secret.
     > One that was created and maintained by somebody else. It
     > costs to create and host sites,
             so?
     > if there is no means for monetization
     > then the likely macro repercussion is less sites
             you mean, less garbage, less misinformation and the like?
             Sounds like a good thing.
     > or more pay-sites.
             but you want people to pay through advertising so what's the
             difference?
     > Perhaps someday on some sites you may choose:  1. micro-crypto
     > payments. 2. give me ads. 3. allow my browser to mini-mine crypto
             .... 4 - put people who run malware on my machine in jail.
     > for
     > the site owner. 4. by donation ie wikipedia.... There is no free
     > lunch, the attitude that people should get something for nothing
     in
     > my opinion is a cancer to society.
             nah, it's the greedy idiots who want to sell or advertise
             garbage and who think they own the computers of other
     people.
             so now go back to your outrageous claim that "
             ad-blocking [is] a form of theft"  and try to grasp how
     fucked
             the claim is.

References

   1. mailto:juan.g71@gmail.com
   2. mailto:j0zffrazier@gmail.com