To be honest, even if every ad were a "good ad", that is to say, if we could guarantee with 100% accuracy that every ad would be unobtrusive, malware free, targeted to things that are relevant to me, without invading my privacy or tracking me, then I'd still keep an ad-blocker installed. The simple fact is that I use an ad blocker because advertising is ubiquitous, and it works- that is to say, it has a measurable psychological affect on the people who are exposed to it. I would vastly prefer to minimize my exposure to things that are trying to convince me that I need things, or make me afraid that I don't have them.
I'd be okay with paying some sort of nominal fee to support a site that reliably has content that I like and is appropriately valued, but those opportunities are very rare. I've occasionally donated $5 or $10 to sites that I use that, when you are using an ad blocker, replace an ad with a message that says something to the extend to "hey, since we're not getting ad revenue from you, would you mind chipping in?". I've never subscribed or disabled my ad blocker for a site that tries to hold it's content hostage, and I can't imagine paying for sights that want $20+/month for a subscription.
Subscriptions are a terrible fit for the bulk of the web, and inhibit one of its signal advantages over other media (free-flow via hyperlinks between pages relevant to one's current purpose). I'd go as far as to say they are anti-web; entirely the wrong funding model.
Ads are from my perspective a disaster from too many angles to list here.
In short we don't have the right funding model available yet. Ads just prop up a poor one, making it possible to appear vaguely viable. So I think the more ad blockers spread, undermining the online ad industry, the better.
I'd be more convincing no doubt if I had the right alternative model at my fingers, but if I did I would probably be working on it not writing it up in HN. Micropayments of some sort seems to be the last man standing, but which and how and by who?
I'd be okay with paying some sort of nominal fee to support a site that reliably has content that I like and is appropriately valued, but those opportunities are very rare. I've occasionally donated $5 or $10 to sites that I use that, when you are using an ad blocker, replace an ad with a message that says something to the extend to "hey, since we're not getting ad revenue from you, would you mind chipping in?". I've never subscribed or disabled my ad blocker for a site that tries to hold it's content hostage, and I can't imagine paying for sights that want $20+/month for a subscription.