My reading of the article about windows 10 ads in File Explorer was abruptly stopped by an intrusive, full-screen ad video.

disable javascript.

Breaks JavaScript, internet no longer works for anything newer than 1995.

If you're willing to have some sites break a bit at first then improve for ones you visit regularly, uMatrix in Firefox is excellent. Many items are disabled by default, but for sites you visit regularly you simply save the rule tweaks you've made for future use.

> Breaks JavaScript

That's a feature, not a bug. JS is super useful, but only when used correctly. It's rarely used correctly anymore.

... when the internet didn't take over what you were trying to read with a full-screen video ad.

But every page had blinking marquees, crappy color schemes, and frames.

My stance on this is that your site should be better if you activate javascript but it should fall back gracefully into a readable format without it.

Your stance on web programming doesn't make a JS-free web reality.

Would you rather not be asked?

Frankly, yes. The presumption that any website should be able to access location information should be taboo.

If it's necessary to determine a location for the purposes of a query (e.g., "where is a pizza restaurant (and personal information feed front-end to personal data tracking, FWIW) near <address> or <postal code>?"), then allow the user to state where they're interested in this.

I've got precisely the same gripes against Google (Maps, etc., Android), Apple, and any given mobile phone provider.

> then allow the user to state where they're interested in this.

Which is precisely what is happening here.

We do not let computers decide whether the purpose is nefarious or good.

No it's not.

If I'm actively engaging in something, and there's the option to specify (note: not be interrupted by a pop-up) for location, manually input, that's within the realm of acceptability.

Though it's distantly possible I might have no idea of my location within, say, a 1km resolution at a point in time, that is an exceptionally distant and rare likelihood for me. And I've no interest in leaving a set of high-time-resolution location tracking datapoints across a slew of data repositories and "information partners".

> that is an exceptionally distant and rare likelihood for me

Congratulations on not getting out much? Please remember you're not everybody. For a lot of people, websites being able to ask for a location is a useful feature.

Keyword: ask. They're not just getting it, they're asking. If you don't want to "leave a set of high-time-resolution location tracking datapoints across a slew of data repositories", you can click no, just as I do almost all the time, except when it's useful.

Because it's useful.

How, specifically, is the OC Weekly having access to your GPS / ICBM coordinates useful to you?

As for my generally excellent sense of geographic location, I make no apologies.

There are other websites. If your beef is with one website, take it up with the website.

Your question was a bad one.

What's the difference between asking for someone to share their location and asking someone to share their address?

That's entirely besides the point. The fact that they're trying to get that information at all is offensive