There's been a lot of brouhaha recently about the proliferation of ad blockers, in both web and mobile contexts. The short version is, advertisers, app developers, and site owners are not happy with consumers making use of ad blocking software to, in their view 'steal content normally paid for by advertising'. That sounds just barely reasonable, on the face of things. However, as a long-time user of ad blockers on all devices that will support them, I call the most strident of shenanigans on this outlook.
Let's consider a purely online context - websites, online games, et cetera. Participating in any sort of online exchange requires a minimum of two separate entry fees: one must own an online-capable device (one-time fee), then pay for a connection (ongoing fee). Ignoring, for now, the original purpose of the Internet (the exchange of information, in a largely non-commercial fashion), that seems reasonable. After all, we purchase physical goods, pay people wages as employees, pay taxes, pay for entertainment, et cetera. It's not a stretch, then, that content producers will expect some manner of compensation for what they have to offer. I have no issue with asking for a just exchange of money for content.
My time and attention are valuable; I only have a certain amount of time and energy during the day, and what I choose to direct it toward, clearly, is a choice I need to make. If that happens to be content someone else has...