Way, way too many websites. I have to research all of them just to use one? I have choice paralysis! The corporations are right, I shouldn’t be trusted to make decisions for myself, and the internet should be like cable.

  • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I used to want this unironically, id pay $30 a month to not see any ads AT ALL. However my mind has changed. I now see ad companies as immoral and, quite frankly, evil.

    I would rather not only not give them money, but I choose to use a Ublock Origin fork AdNauseam that ‘clicks’ on all the ads. This seems counter intuitive, but since some advertisers pay per click so clicking a total of a combined 10,000 advertisements on my desktop/laptop/steam deck/whatever costs them a LOT of money, and I’ve bought 0 products from advertisements because i haven’t seen any advertisements!

    The best part is that you get an image of all the ads. It’s super cool to look and see what they want you to buy and you can play the guessing game of “What Was My ADHD Ass Looking At?!”

    (this SS is from ~2 months in iirc, now I’m ~6-10 months in, I’ll have to check when I get home.)

    • Echolynx@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’d never heard of AdNauseam; does it replace uBlock entirely? Is it possible to run both?

      • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Just run adnauseam on its own. I use it too, my thinking is that I am going to be tracked anyway. So instead of trying and almost certainly failing at avoiding it, you just overwhelm them with so much random data that it becomes worthless.

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      It’s fucked when the unlimited option in this meme is less then I pay for internet now. I pay over 200 a month just for the fucking internet. Fuck Cox cable and shit choices I don’t have in my town.

      • dai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Christ, I knew Australian ISP pricings were exy but that’s absurd.

        I’m looking at going to a 500 / 250? (Might be 100 up) Plan for around 140 AUD per month, I’d much rather have symmetrical Gbit but that’s well put of my price range.

        $200 USD is around $315 AUD currently, that’s a whole ballpark of fucked up.

        • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yes it is. But that is the price to have gigabyte internet with unlimited data. Unfortunately without that it cost me more than 200 a month. Because they charge 50 dollars every gig you go over your data cap. So I pay 100 bucks so we don’t. Because I have 3 gamers in the house streams.

          I tried to go lower but every fucking time I get nailed with the limit and end up 300 dollar bills. It’s shit but all I can get here.

      • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Fuck that is expensive. £24/month here and I use 4G so I can take my router anywhere and it just works.

  • terminhell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    Crap, I’d have to get the everything package. Only due to not using any of those platforms but YouTube. Even that I could live without.

  • answersplease77@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    It’s already like this in many countries in Asia. They offer data pacakages that are 50GB (for example) for social media data , and only 1GB for regular internet

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      They offer data pacakages that are 50GB (for example) for social media data , and only 1GB for regular internet

      In fairness, social media and streaming are absolute data hogs. I could get by very easily with 1GB for the old school message board internet of the early '00s.

      No idea how anyone uses internet for business purposes, though.

    • voxel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      my former ukrainian data plan only had 100mb per day, but 10gb on Youtube and unlimited social media (e.g. facebook and reddit + messenger apps like viber, signal and telegram)

      to be fair, its not the norm here and it was cheap af back when i was using it (around 1-2$/mo while all other data plans were over 4-6$)

      • voxel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        also i was using a vpn with an ssn spoofing feature to make it think all of the websites/services i was visiting were Youtube (that only worked for tcp traffic tho, not udp so no gaming)

        and was using telegram bots to download flarge files (there are bots that will take a url and will either return a file located there or a rendered web page)

  • Sunshine (she/her)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    This is literally what happens when people defend first-past-the-post! “More than 2 viable choices at the ballot box is scary!” “I need my corporate politicians to protect me from using my brain”

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I’m no fan of FPTP, but that point doesn’t apply here. Democrats have consistently supported Net Neutrality.

      Net Neutrality was legislated by the Democratic majority in the FCC in 2015. It was then repealed by the Republican majority, championed by Pai and Carr, in 2018. It was then reinstated when the Democrats regained majority in 2024.

    • ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      Can’t say I’ve ever seen anyone defend the system in play, just recognizing that it exists and until it’s changed in whatever means possible that playing the protest/spoiler is likely to make things worse.

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    They could theoretically implement this because of unencrypted domain names and ISP blocks, but if they actually tried this, that DNS over HTTPS thing Mozilla was working on - I’m sure it would get a lot more attention, be rolled out very soon, and disable ISPs being able to see or control which domains you were accessing.

    • Atropos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      Not if the only “allowed” services don’t include that VPN.

      There are nearly always ways around this sort of thing, but it gets exponentially harder as soon as VPNs get blocked.