> the comparison to stealing really misses the mark
I know this always triggers a hard-coded response based on regex, but the comparison doesn't rely on the specifics of stealing, so it's not a valid criticism. The logic is: people offer things in exchange for a price. You can take the things in exchange for the price, or you can leave the things. You shouldn't take the things without paying the price.
Why? I truly believe I have no moral obligation to any of these entities and I see them as amoral organizations _at best_ who can't possibly reciprocate
But it's not the advertising company you're denying revenue from. It's the website you're visiting, who've chosen to pay for the content you're happy to take via advertising.
You do! In fact, I have a boxter and a 911, and I'm about to take out a mortgage for a Carerra GT. Why aren't you doing your part!? Are you gasp poor, or worse, lazy??? Am I going to have to report you to DepHomeSec?
I know this always triggers a hard-coded response based on regex, but the comparison doesn't rely on the specifics of stealing, so it's not a valid criticism. The logic is: people offer things in exchange for a price. You can take the things in exchange for the price, or you can leave the things. You shouldn't take the things without paying the price.