Hunt is under the impression that he has a right to force Web clients to consume content like he wants to after it has left his server. This is, of course, not how the Web works, and he should know better. There is no point in getting upset about it and then writing a blog entry. Content blocking is a direct consequence of past abuse. He must understand even though he thinks he does nothing wrong, the bar of acceptability for people who subscribe to content blocker update lists – after past abuse – is: no distraction at all.
Having a peace of mind without advertisement intruding into it is a human right. I would be glad if someone could find for me that article making that legal argument.
> He must understand even though he thinks he does nothing wrong, the bar of acceptability for people who subscribe to content blocker update lists – after past abuse – is: no distraction at all.
Simple solution for you then: Don't visit sites with advertising. By repeatedly visiting sites with advertising, you're basically saying, "I want all this content but I'm not willing to support them financially."
