Nope. You become an edge case which now has to be supported which likely costs more than you’re paying (except to a smaller efficient business). If you pay more and more you just become more and more of an outlier.

The only way out is buying devices on which you can flash and use OS/software that was built without profit as a goal (e.g., free software).

Anything short of that and you're just sitting under the Sword of Damocles of value extraction, ripe to be used and abused (within personal tolerance or otherwise).

I know you are right, but I've tried doing the de-googled Android thing (when I was an Android user even). It sucks, hard. Android is a pretty bad UX platform to begin with, and trying to make it work with free software is just... awful.

I can't contribute because I only have so many hours in a day. I'd rather pay. I'd pay a boatload for an operating system that replaces Android with something that has a good user experience and has no ads.

I pay for a lifetime license on adguard, on Android. It is vanishing rare to see ads and the audit logs show how often and which apps are having their telemetry and other trackers blocked. It blocks a lot of Google stuff.

That's the reason I stay with android. The Apple version of the app (which has to come through the app store) is not allowed to block anything for Apple apps or services. This they exempt themselves from user control.

I am skeptical of apps claiming to block telemetry. There is a feedback loop that app/service developers like Adguard can use for blocking ads - if an ad shows up, they can look into blocking it.

It's not the same for telemetry. There's no way to verify none is transmitted, and difficult to intercept it or distinguish it from essential traffic. Not all telemetry goes to an HTTP endpoint. Some telemetry-like fingerprinting data can be gathered from basic requests (like an email provider scanning email headers, a phone app developer screening spam calls/numbers, a password manager storing domains of your accounts, and so on). More can be sent along with basic requests. And there is much more data/telemetry engineers could do if the number of users interfering with their methods became statistically significant.

I don't mean to fearmonger. I believe that most telemetry gathered is harmless to any particular user and is just used by data scientists and MBAs trying to see trends they can exploit in their business strategy. Ads probably have a much larger impact on an individual (emotional and mental effects), and there is value to ad-blocking services like Adguard. Still, apps claiming to block tracking, fingerprinting, and telemetry seem to target a very naive audience.

It sounds similar to movie streaming vs piracy.

Sir, have some self respect. If you're willing to pay several thousands USD for a phone, I don't believe the ads are the actual issue here.

lol what.

I don't want to see ads. I will pay to not see ads. I earn well and can afford to spend a lot of money on making my life less bad/more good. Due to the way the world is, my phone is one of the most used items I own. I view ads as one of the biggest uncontrollable annoyances in my life. Yet I have no option to pay to not see ads.

In my humblest of opinions, those who accept ads are the ones without self respect. Please share what you think the problem is though.

In your comment you were begging one of the worlds most valuable companies to "allow you" to pay more for their already exaggeratedly expensive products, for the purpose of not seeing ads. And if that wasn't already submissive enough, you also voluntary become complicit in this ill-behaving industry by suggesting that ads are fine for the vast majority of people that could not or would not want to afford paying a premium on the already premium, for not seeing adds.

Look I can't change the world. I certainly can't change the practices of trillion dollar companies. I just don't want ads.