Did you read the same article as me? They are only charging if you block ads. If you whitelist them on your ad blocker, you&#x27;ll see the content.  Its clear they know no one will pay, but need to address the neckbeardy complaints that will come their way about &#x27;being forced to see ads,&#x27; &#x27;being forced to be tracked,&#x27; etc.<p>&gt;Suggested Solution:<p>I see nothing wrong with the solution as is: view ads or pay to block. It seems like the rational middle ground here.  Oh and they&#x27;re committed to &#x27;polite&#x27; ads. I don&#x27;t think I&#x27;ve ever seen a loud ad on their site, ever. So this is a pretty easy commitment for them. I do hope that all this drama is making web publishers reconsider how loud and obnoxious most advertising is on the web, especially the mobile web.<p>My big fear is that publishing will move into free hosting, namely on Facebook and other walled gardens. I think there are some pretty evil unintended consequences of ubiquitous ad blocking that no one is really considering yet.