Yekke2:
I did see that generalisation. ZD was making the point that he requires unfettered access, and that this applies to most people. My response was two-pronged. Firstly, I don’t believe him in that the options you suggested (Adblocker, whitelist, blacklist) would cause him significant monetary loss, and secondly, that even if he were in this magically unique position were the entire internet from YouTube to CNN to heaven-knows-what is absolutely necessary lest he lose precious money, the fact is that most people aren’t. That is a fact. A worker in a desk job, most industries, and therefore most working people, even if they require certain aspects, do not require everything. Not that I believe he is in that special position, as I said. I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear.
And before ZD interjects with the numerous ways he does require the Internet, without let nor hindrance, even in the unlikely event that YouTube, to pick one example, is absolutely needed for technical questions, and there is absolutely no other way to receive this vital information, why can this not be done on a non-portable device in a public setting? The same applies to all these other ‘vital’ onlne services. Speaking to ZD directly, are you honestly saying that the entire internet must be completely open all the time? Yes or No? And whilst I’m at it, do you believe there are dangers online that people must be wary of even if they believe they can withstand them through willpower alone. Yes or No?
(Frankly, I don’t know why I bother leaving off with a Yes/No question. I, and others, have tried this before and not received an answer, despite it being about as clear as humanely possible. Ah well, maybe I’ll get lucky…)