There is no "free" content. There's just content that you pay for by putting up with impositions on your attention.

I despise the distractions of advertising. Were it up to me, billboards on the freeway would be illegal. I'd be willing to bet good money that the deployment of those LED billboards, that cycle through a variety of content, some of it animated, has led to higher rates of accidents in their immediate vicinity.

I use AdBlock Plus, and you will never argue me out of using it. I would love to support Slate and the other sites I frequent -- and where sites offer me the option, I do. If Slate gave me an option to pay, say, $10/month (or whatever) to get an ad-free version without resorting to plugins and my own hacks, I would cheerfully sign up. Advertisers are never getting value off advertising to me in any case -- and in fact, there are brands that have managed to earn my scorn through obnoxious ad campaigns. And you are never going to earn a dime from my viewing of ads either. So how about you let me pay you?

Agree 100%, auros. I gladly support good sites, and I think more sites should use very modest subscription fees (about $1 a month) instead of ads. I think they'd be surprised at the positive reponse.

I hated it when grocery stores started pasting ads on the floor. Good grief.

We need Adblock Plus for highways, stores, newspapers, etc.

Yes, I'll support good content too.

I'm building a new online payments system that hopeful can work. 1. Charge up 2. Pick the amount you want, and click pay. It's design to be simple, fast.

Look it up at google: blog payments.> It'll be on the right side. (i couldn't put the url here).

Would you use this? Something like del.icio.us - where its one click from the website. But instead on "post" it will pay the publisher.