depends, they definitely didn't build "the streets" they plaster with ads but if it's their channel or their website, it's up us to pay for blockers, put effort into doing ourselves or using one of the tools build by generous contributors who crave user-defined spaces instead of 'enforced and conform' ("VC"-)demand-based spaces
What service am I getting when I’ subjected to a billboard that says “get a smooth kitty” with a picture of a Sphinx cat, exactly? (It’s for laser hair removal and is clever but that makes it more annoying because my kids ask me what it means)
depends, they definitely didn't build "the streets" they plaster with ads but if it's their channel or their website, it's up us to pay for blockers, put effort into doing ourselves or using one of the tools build by generous contributors who crave user-defined spaces instead of 'enforced and conform' ("VC"-)demand-based spaces
No. bad analogy.
Stealing my time and attention. Much more bothered about advertising in my face than IP infringement.
In exchange for a service. It is the way you pay it. You can simply refuse to transact.
What service am I getting when I’ subjected to a billboard that says “get a smooth kitty” with a picture of a Sphinx cat, exactly? (It’s for laser hair removal and is clever but that makes it more annoying because my kids ask me what it means)
My bad, I thought you were talking only about advertising in media.
And mental health.
and my energy (CPU, etc)
Then why do companies claim I am stealing from them when I use an adblocker?
Because the implicit contract for you to consume their content is that you pay it either by subscribing or by seeing ads.
It is not that difficult to understand.
But if viewing ads is a payment method, then you must also understand that showing me ads (without giving me anything in return) is stealing.