Firefox replaces adverts with works of art
Pictures to hang in a gallery
PUNTERS who are fed up with adverts on websites can replace the lot with tasteful art.
A new add-in for Firefox kills off advertising found on a page and replaces it with curated art.
Addart will work with the Adblockplus. While Adblockplus replaces each advert with a less annoying blank space, Addart will connect to an online database of artworks and dump them in the space.
The picture database will be updated every two weeks and include the work of contemporary artists.
The idea is being pushed by Steve Lambert, and developed by an outfit called Eyebeam.
We wanted to show you a picture of the INQ site with works of art on it instead of adverts, but our advertising manager, Dirk "quids in" Thrusting clutched his wallet, foamed at the mouth and turned puce. If it was not for the office defibrillator, which a former editor nicked from the underground, we might have lost him. µ
L'Inq
Makezine
Comments
Yeah
Glad to hear this. I'm sure these adverts companies would shove a advert up our arses if they could. Good for Firefox.Ads and the Arts
I do wonder how long it takes for the "art" to become published with a small price tag at the bottom of each displayed work of "art". Thus replacing ads with ads. Way to go.However, are there still people around that do not use adblock? Poor, poor, poor chumps.
--
Greetings Bertho
Subliminal suggestion
Now we'll see how long it takes surfers to realize that a particular picture makes them thirsty for a Pepsi, and another has them reaching for a phone to order pizza...Hmmmm
Chaps, maybe you should start to advertise your subscription plans ... Me personality is ready to pay for quality news 'n gossip.It doesn't work.
I installed it and it does nothing except their seem to be more ads now than before.Adverts suck
Yet another reason to use FireFox !Needs a subsciption to easylist.org to work.
Go to http://easylist.adblockplus.org/ and subscribe. Then it works fine.whitelist the sites you like
I put the inquirer and other sites I like on my whitelist. Rewarding those that I actually get some information from or enjoy or both :) I even click on ads just to keep the whole system going, never bought anything based on them though...bought stuff based on your news reports much bigger stuff than I have seen ads for.Sean
very stupid idea
this is a no brainer, what do you think web page admins will do?Ill tell you what i will be doing to my web page if this is implimented...
i'll be blocking people who have firefox from visiting my site.
Before you call me an asshole, hear me out, my ad revenue pays for my webhost, domain name ect...
All these great sites you love so much is being paid for by ad support, now why should i pay out of my pocket for your visit to my site, because you dont like ads?
If you cant understand or dont care about the amount of work and the costs of bandwidth ect... then why should we care about you visiting our sites?
pop up pop unders and various nafarious ad tactics should be proactively filtered out, but the standard none invasive ads like google serve a purpose, they allow all these tiny interesting sites to exist.
Think twice before supporting a moronic idea like this.
Heck if you really like a site make an effort to click on their ads, thats a good way to show your respect and appreciation for all the hard work your enjoying while serfing.
Here´s a better idea
The Internet is mostly paid for with advertising, if people disable it, it makes the adspace less valuable.Here´s what I suggest. Instead of protesting the idea of people stealing your information, offer them full use of it. But instead of it getting collected and processed by random people, tell them they can come up whatever ideas they want, but the information only gets collected by and STAYS on your computer. If they want to make money off of it, they need to find a computer in your town or surrounding area that is run by someone YOU trust, and they get to process the information with whatever program has passed that particular person´s inspection. I would suggest an open source model for the inspection software. Non-disclosure agreements are fine, but people need to be able to get a second opinion. If both Fox News and CNN give it a pass(as an example) then I guess that´s good enough for me, though maybe not for others.
The Internet needs advertising to survive, otherwise it will become a pay-for-play model that most people won´t like. I agree that advertising is intrusive, but if you suppress it, you´re suppressing the very thing that makes the content free.
Out of control
Advertising is rampant on the Internet. At least on Television we get one ad at a time. On the internet you get a handful of ads at any one time. What is worst is all that "content" that people claim they provide and they provide it thanks to ads, whatever, your content sucks.Like ZDNet for example, they have one article spread across 10 pages, each one of those 10 pages has a tiny little "content" area in the center and everything else is ads, I don't even like being smothered by real content, much less be smothered by stupid ads.
So go ahead and block Firefox, watch your revenue drop. Or do nothing and watch your revenue drop. I'd rather look at art than a bloody ad any day.
This madness must end...
Wha-wha-WHAT..?!
Television only has one ad at a time? Oh, you mean SIMULTANEOUSLY I guess. I suppose some might think it's much better to wait through eight or ten thirty second spots to get back to the next eight to twelve minutes of television programming than it is to reflexively ignore the ads on web pages you're reading, huh. I would never have imagined it personally but hey, to each their own...Don't like ads or feel they aren't worth the content you're receiving? Vote "with your feet" and find your content elsewhere!
TANSTAAFL