Are You Paying to Watch Ads?
- 18
- Add a Comment
Welcome to the Twilight Zone… where you pay for the advertising you view.
I found out something new when I phoned my ISP to complain about an $11 charge added to my bill for broadband use. I don’t download music. I avoid huge video files like YouTube. I do upload photos to Flickr and my blogs. I do window shop for open source and freeware programs. Until the last three months I was not paying extra for the broadband I used. That changed.
I am not uploading more photos than before. I’m not downloading more programs. What has changed are the flood of videos in blogs and most of all, the flood of ads using heavier files which take a long time to load even with my new PC and DSL connection. I am paying to see these files. I don’t want to see them and I very much don’t want to pay for them.
Why is it that each time we make the Internet faster we also make it slower? I wouldn’t say my connection running on DSL is really a lot faster than my old dial up connection ten years ago. In theory it should be much faster, light speed in comparison. It doesn’t seem to be that way. First, it was those HTML emails that slowed it down. Then the pop up ads which had to stop everything while they forced a new window open. Flash ads which often opened a new window and crashed your PC cause they couldn’t suck up bandwidth fast enough. Now, sites are running video ads which make you wait for them to load whether you like it or not. They slow your computer right down so you can’t even get it to move to another site or another page until the video has loaded.
Next month my broadband overflow is higher than $11, I asked when I changed my account. If I pay an extra $5 a month I have more broadband for the ads that want to suck it up. I’m still being screwed over. But, maybe it will cost me just a bit less each month. Thanks, yeah… thanks a lot!

18 Comments
marc klink
June 21st, 2007
at 12:22pm
Are you located outside the U.S.? No one I am aware of is charged this way here. If so, what are the rates? Just wondering because we are being told that this type of billing might be coming, however I think a mass revolt just might deveolp.
thatgrrl
June 21st, 2007
at 4:13pm
I’m in Ontario, Canada. Being charged extra for bandwidth use isn’t all that new. I know it was around in the US back when everyone was using dial up. I think changing to DSL just bought some time before it came back.
I’d like to see Firefox come up with a non-video setting. I have already chosen not to download some of the plugins. The problem is that I do use a couple for playing online games. So, I do get those bandwidth sucking ads too.
Maybe it is an idea for the next version of Firefox.
Marcel
June 22nd, 2007
at 1:28am
Dear creative fg,
Perhaps you could start using something like hosts.zip @ www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm ?
If you read true this you’ll understand why.
I’ve been using this for some years now.
It helps a lot.
regards,
Marcel
Mike Nelson
June 22nd, 2007
at 3:08am
As a tech, the first thought in my head is her computer being used to send out spam, virus, etc. Highjackers are getting smarter these days, as they want to sit in the background and not even let the person know their computer has been highjacked.
Wesley
June 22nd, 2007
at 4:44am
Try using the NoScript Firefox extension (http://noscript.net/).
Their site claims that “The NoScript Firefox extension provides extra protection for Firefox, Flock, Seamonkey and others mozilla-based browsers: this free, open source add-on allows JavaScript and Java execution only for trusted domains of your choice (e.g. your home-banking web site).”
This will block your Java and Flash ads automatically for you. Then you can begin creating whitelists of sites you want to run these applications. I was introduced to this extension from Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte’s Security Now podcast.
Have a great day,
Wes
Russ LeRogue
June 22nd, 2007
at 5:21am
And now here’s something else to throw into the mix: just how fast IS your high speed access (i.e.: DSL)? I’ve heard/seen a lot of complaints recently that DSL providers have apparently overextended their capacity to provide service at the speeds they are advertising.
This, on top of everything you mentioned here, can be one of the biggest bottlenecks to high speed internet access. I haven’t check my DSL speeds lately, but I know that it has slowed considerably over the past few months as the phone company has added more and more DSL customers … and as sites have added more and more ads and videos.
Rien Jansens
June 22nd, 2007
at 5:38am
Get a HOSTS file that blocks all the URL’s that try to connect to ads. Works like a charm. Just go here: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hostsfaq.htm
Helen
June 22nd, 2007
at 5:48am
Use an email programme that blocks images like thunderbird with a good spam filter, and use a pop up blocker on your browser, and make sure that you have no naughties on the pc that could be hijacking all the bandwidth.
Netmeter is a good downloadable programme that you could use to monitor your bandwidth.
and yes Marc this is happening in a lot of countried including the UK where people can choose their package by the amount of bandwidth they require.
Kinda you get what you pay for, and as in the case, sometimes you get what you don’t want to pay for (or need).
Pal
June 22nd, 2007
at 6:08am
There are extensions for FireFox which can limit the amount of garbage you download, particularly Adblock. Every banner ad or flash advertisement that I encounter brings up Adblock, and I filter out another marketer. I might be mistaken, but as I understand it the extension does not download content from the sites you add to your filter list, which would reduce the bandwidth you’re using.
For example, this very page has an iframe for doubleclick.net. I block anything from them using the filter “*.doubleclick.net*”, which catches anything from that advertiser. Some sites convert all their banner ads to images on their own web site, which makes it very tough to filter, but I have yet to encounter a such a site that I just HAVE to visit.
Ted Sbardella
June 22nd, 2007
at 7:06am
Firefox has several extensions that you can load that will help. There is adblock to block ads. Flashblock to block flash, and NoScript to block scripts. It makes browsing much faster and cleaner. Also this may be a bit much but if you search for “Host file” you can find a host file that will block a lot of ad sites and malware sites. Best to make sure that your PC is not a zombie that is sending out spam or DOS attacks as well that can make your pc use a lot of bandwidth.
Diana
June 22nd, 2007
at 10:58am
If you’re running Firefox, the ad-stopping must-have extensions are Adblock and the Adblock Filterset.G Updater, Flashblock, and ImgLikeOpera. You can ditch at least 75% or more of the ads with those extensions.
Gregg
June 22nd, 2007
at 11:05am
I don’t pay extra based on usage, but I think that my ISP throttles my usage to lower levels if they think I’m hogging too much bandwidth. I’m in the U.S. and my ISP is Comcast. Even though I don’t pay extra, I still don’t like waiting for the big advertisements. Firefox extensions can help you regain control of your browsing experience. I use the ‘NoScript’ and ‘AdBlock Plus’ extensions.
Sean
June 22nd, 2007
at 2:44pm
That’s why I have a DNS server with a null zone in it. Anyone who gets greedy on the bandwidth gets assigned to 127.0.0.1 and never displays anything on my system ever again. Sorry if you lost revenue, but my time is worth something as well.
Ken
June 22nd, 2007
at 3:13pm
As a start in changing Firefox’s behavior, go to Tools, Options, Content and check the first box and uncheck the other three boxes.
Also, you can install and use the Adblock Plus and Remove it Permanently extensions to block unwanted parts of pages that you visit frequently.
Consider using the Flashblock extension.
There is also a NoScript extension, but it interferes with Flashblock. You have to choose between the two.
James Camuso
June 23rd, 2007
at 8:10am
We need a new web.
Those that choose to surf the internet like a large city shopping mall where everything for everybody is available everywhere can continue to use the present web. U-tube, myspace, blog-o-mania, yahoo, any gaming (talk about your social/cultural backsliding of a nation when we pay for playing with kid’s toys on the most advanced technology on the planet), porn, and other visual gratification for an excuse to avoid going outside have their place. It is on the present form of interactive connection between computers.
The social web fulfills a need for people to connect and learn more about the world through the comments and deeds of others, possibly reducing prejudice and cultural bias along the way. The real danger is that there is no public presence of good citizens walking the streets of the internet that keeps sexual predators and evil minded scammers from acting for fear of getting caught. What “in person” contact used to call a conscience.
Thus we are subjected to the mega-flood of flash ads and malicious mal-ware attacks on our broadband connections.
They attack us because we let them and leave the door open with no one watching.
Keep that web for the people that want to be connected to all the evil in the world lest they miss out on something. It is like when you were a child and you would not go to bed because you might miss something.
Start a new internet. This time insist on government interference in the form of censorship.
It served to provide values and integrity in youth for 300 years in this country through the old public school system before we decided that children cannot be disciplined or they will be traumatized for life.
The new web2 could be for information and educational purposes. If a service or product corresponds to the information, a link to the old web can be used to take care of commerce. NO ADS period.
The troubles with the web can be likened to the phrase “in order for evil to exist it only takes a good man to do nothing.”
I may be rambling on the moral degradation of society, but every day I see the web getting closer to a scene from a pirate movie where there exists a city of such wanton pleasure seeking and criminal activity with no consequences that soon it destroys itself from lack of support by those that care about maintaining it. The collapse is delayed mostly by quick fixes that only serve to hide the real problems.
How many people will get hurt is directly related to how many continue to pay to be hurt.
shadowmyth
June 23rd, 2007
at 8:29pm
Have you tried using Adblock for Firefox? Wow, I’d be charged a fortune if I was charged for bandwidth, I really feel for you!
Tim McGowan
June 24th, 2007
at 7:23am
But you have heard of FlashBlock for Firefox, haven’t you?
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/
As I understand it, that prevents the code from even being downloaded, let alone played. Am I wrong about that?
You can also disable automatic loading of images in Firefox — and better, you can make exceptions. So if you don’t want to see the four-leaf clover and fancy text on my site (http://www.mcgowanreporting.com/), then in Firefox click Tools, Content, and the second Exceptions button. Enter the address of the site you want to block, click the Block button, and then the Close and OK buttons.
I understand you can also prevent all image loading but make exceptions for those sites you want specifically to allow.
I’m not sure what to do, though, about graphics-intensive e-mail. I know most e-mail clients can be set not to show images, and that’ll help if the images are stored on the Web and referenced by address, but if they’re packaged into the e-mail, the way so much spam is sent these days — or pictures of the in-laws’ cat — I don’t know how to block them at the source. Since your ISP is charging you for the content, they might have ideas. But I suspect they’ll simply suggest that you screen your e-mail first through their Web interface.
Glen
July 6th, 2007
at 6:43am
I will have to look at my phone bill to see if I am being charged for extra bandwith. Thanks for the tips