I'm a software engineer working as a full-stack developer using JavaScript, Node.js, and React. I write about my experiences in tech, tutorials, and share helpful hints.
The more I think about it, how are ads in a software package any different from other sources? Why is an ad on a website, program installer (virus protection add-on ads), TV show product placement, commercial break, billboard, podcast, or radio more acceptable? Those are asking for you to buy products or donate, but I do not see uproar about that. It seems like the people doing podcasts are likable and it is hard work, so they get a free pass. A podcast is just an open-source conversation. Open-source software takes hard work as well. Using a product for free, that you did not contribute to, and then making demands/complaints isn't a good look.
I don't mind ads, I just want ethical advertising. No tracking, listening to conversations, etc. Get sponsors that are relevant to your content and display them. I think that is a more effective way to get my business. If I do not agree with the method they are using to advertise, I'm blocking, skipping the ads, or not using that content/service.
I've been a professional C, Perl, PHP and Python developer.
I'm an ex-sysadmin from the late 20th century.
These days I do more Javascript and CSS and whatnot, and promote UX and accessibility.
How is it different? In a purely capitalist way, it probably isn't. It's the placement though. It's - do you want to get an ad on your navigation when you're driving.
"In 100 meters, turn - BUY OUR NEAT LASER POINTERS."
I'm a software engineer working as a full-stack developer using JavaScript, Node.js, and React. I write about my experiences in tech, tutorials, and share helpful hints.
I think it is dangerous (and unsuitable) while driving because it poses a safety risk. A flashy or loud ad catching your attention instead of focusing on the road could lead to an accident. I agree it shouldn't be there while driving.
I do not know if I can make the leap from unsuitable to outright dangerous or wrong. I think all ads are unsuitable to some degree, they interrupt what you are intending to do by showing the ad. For the case of ads injected into packages, I think severity plays a role. If the ad shows after installing the package on a development machine, not a big deal and harmless if it is small and shows once, while still being unsuitable. If they give the option to silence those messages, I think that is a good middle ground and ethical. To equate it to the driving example, I think it would be dangerous if it shows in production logs while debugging, if it prevents the package from working due to an issue with the ads, or if it is a constant annoyance. I think the latter scenario should definitely be avoided.
I don't know about you, and its not really your point, but I do get advertisements in my navigation while driving.
The nearest McDonalds, the nearest coffee place... want to buy a new car? It shows me where the nearest BMW dealership is. All while I'm driving on the freeway.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
The more I think about it, how are ads in a software package any different from other sources? Why is an ad on a website, program installer (virus protection add-on ads), TV show product placement, commercial break, billboard, podcast, or radio more acceptable? Those are asking for you to buy products or donate, but I do not see uproar about that. It seems like the people doing podcasts are likable and it is hard work, so they get a free pass. A podcast is just an open-source conversation. Open-source software takes hard work as well. Using a product for free, that you did not contribute to, and then making demands/complaints isn't a good look.
I don't mind ads, I just want ethical advertising. No tracking, listening to conversations, etc. Get sponsors that are relevant to your content and display them. I think that is a more effective way to get my business. If I do not agree with the method they are using to advertise, I'm blocking, skipping the ads, or not using that content/service.
How is it different? In a purely capitalist way, it probably isn't. It's the placement though. It's - do you want to get an ad on your navigation when you're driving.
"In 100 meters, turn - BUY OUR NEAT LASER POINTERS."
That's an unsuitable place for an ad, too.
I think it is dangerous (and unsuitable) while driving because it poses a safety risk. A flashy or loud ad catching your attention instead of focusing on the road could lead to an accident. I agree it shouldn't be there while driving.
I do not know if I can make the leap from unsuitable to outright dangerous or wrong. I think all ads are unsuitable to some degree, they interrupt what you are intending to do by showing the ad. For the case of ads injected into packages, I think severity plays a role. If the ad shows after installing the package on a development machine, not a big deal and harmless if it is small and shows once, while still being unsuitable. If they give the option to silence those messages, I think that is a good middle ground and ethical. To equate it to the driving example, I think it would be dangerous if it shows in production logs while debugging, if it prevents the package from working due to an issue with the ads, or if it is a constant annoyance. I think the latter scenario should definitely be avoided.
I don't know about you, and its not really your point, but I do get advertisements in my navigation while driving.
The nearest McDonalds, the nearest coffee place... want to buy a new car? It shows me where the nearest BMW dealership is. All while I'm driving on the freeway.