I don't think we do agree, honestly.

By blocking ads, you keep the price of advertising high. If advertising was more measurably effective, it would be of broader use to everyone (including the niche D&D dice shops), and something that every business could honestly make a budget line for.

Right now, advertising is only open to the big-name-brands or orgs with hidden deep pockets behind them (venture capitalists), because it just broadly spams everyone with a generic message, rather than being relevant and personalized.

You have given in to the belief that advertising MUST suck by definition, while I feel that advertising doesn't have to suck, and could actually be a value-add.

Thought Experiment: The Economist has excellent content available on two identical sites. On Economist A, it is the same as it is today with generic useless advertising network content. On Economist B, it subscribes to an ad network that customizes all ad content according to my preferences.

Instead of my $12/year subscription that I currently pay for Economist A (and why the FUCK do I still get ads on the version of the site I PAY FOR?!?), I'd pay $5/month for Economist B.

And I'd actually click on the ads, because they were of value to me, and not potential landmines.

(Even if I see an ad for something I want, I will close my browser, open another, and Google search for the product. I will NEVER click on an ad intentionally, today. Too risky.)