i do the same using only noscript. there is a setting to disallow flash even on temp / whitelist sites until it's clicked.

The model exists and is called flattr. It does not work that good, i guess for serveral reasons:
- The amount of money you need to spend per month is only 2 Eur
- Initially everyone needed to pay, now you can receive without paying yourself iirc. So they'll have many "i hope i get flattred but do not contribute myself" users.
- They have a "like" Button, which needs thirdparty scripts and so on, so it gets blocked by antitracking addons, noscript, adblock, etc. instead of a browseraddon for the contributing user.

they at least wanted to add click to play. i used flashblock in the past and the noscript-flashblock for a long time by now. konqueror was one of the first browsers with click-to-play function.

ads make you buy products you did not intend to buy. apple.com allows you to buy products you wanted to buy before you even visited the page.

as google text ads are considered not to obstrusive, google would happily degrate sites with many image/flash/... banners

They cannot win. There are more people with the urge to block, than adblocker-blockers.
The best they can get, is to lose the adblocking visitors.

you followed the story about gmx, 1&1 and other united internet services, which called adblock a malware? Except from streisand, they got a very bad reputation in the media as well.

have a look at flattr. you pay a fixed amount anyway, whether you spend it or not. if you like something, you click a button, in the end of the month, your money gets distributed. that way, the click does not cost anything you don't pay anyway, so you can click without thinking about the cost.

you do not need flashblock. just tell noscript to block flash on trusted pages as well and you have flashblock like placeholders.

As soon as you would try to make such a model, everyone would come, create some alibi website and tell the world, he needs one dollar of your 230 USD per year. If there is money, people get greedy.

sounds like he has a lot of bitcoins, so he wants to preserve their status.

Altcoins are having success, even parody ones. Why? Because *coins are a ponzi scheme. Who comes first, gets more for less.
Yeah, creators ARE premining. But nevertheless, the first users can do cheap mining as well, paid by the users who are joining later. Because of this effect you cannot tell people to boycott altcoins, when they have the opportunity to make a lot more money there than with bitcoin.

So maybe there will not be mined more and more bitcoins, but for every coin-currency which is "used up", there will come a successor, which can be mined from start. So its a meta-coin, which does not work by hashing more and more transactions, but by creating new currencies, which will replace the old ones.

People like you are the people, whose mailservers spam the rest of us.

Next time use a rickroll video without GEMA blocking ;).

Its because cracker is a stupid word. First i think of cookies, then i think of people creating keygens. No, cracker is no word for "evil hacker".

should not join discussions, online or offline.

your mailprovider does, using SPF and DKIM.