Well that's interesting. For me 99.5% of websites work perfectly using ublock origin. The only .5% remaining are websites that actively refuse to serve any kind of adblock users, not because it breaks functionality on their site. I don't think I can recall having visited a single website that would have features break unintentionally because of ublock in the past few years.

Can't agree with you, Dynamics 365 is one of them (it's shit but I've implemented it at work). EDF (French main electricity provider) also breaks for me. That's one example from a big company, and one example with a big user base.

The Denver Post just lost my business over this. They have one of those things that scrambles all the words for any user with the audacity to not want to see video+audio ads while reading their newspaper.

Is it their content to do what they want with? Sure.

Does the same logic apply to the $9 I used to give them each month? You're damn right.

Hard agree. If I'm paying for content, I'd accept a small number of discrete advertising. Video advertising on a text/ photo site pisses me off in general and if I was paying for it? No chance I'd let that fly.

I don't think my experience is vastly different from yours. I do get some sites where pop-overs or cookie notifications are blocked but it's not clear and you just can't scroll. I could turn off those blocker settings, but the notifications are annoying enough it's worth it.

It depends on how many privacy lists you have added, probably.

Normal display ads all being blocked is generally fine 99% of the time, but if you care about not being permanently tracked across the internet then there are a couple more domains you have to add - except some sites make it mandatory that those invasive fingerprinting scripts and port scanners run and report back a session, otherwise you're refused login or banned.