Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 462 posts

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#71

Post by ultramancool »

laurent123456 wrote: post #62
corford wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's going to be hard for facebook because they're such a big target. I think where ad-blockers will start to have problems is with the millions of lesser known sites. Once these publishers swap over to proxying ad-content through their own domains and using a handful of simple evasion tactics (random file name for the self hosted JS file that pulls in the ad, site specific pseudo-random DOM element names for the ad…

Proxying ads would be a big security risk though since it means they would run within the same sandbox as the rest of the page, which might be why it hasn't often been done yet.

It'd also be a big risk in that it'd be easier to cheat the ads as they'd all come from the same connecting IP. I doubt advertisers would appreciate that much.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#72

Post by spdionis »

> User adoption of ad-blocking software has grown rapidly in recent years, particularly outside of the U.S. According to estimates by online advertising trade body the Interactive Advertising Bureau, 26% of U.S. internet users now use ad blockers on their desktop devices.

Well, where are the numbers backing "particularly outside of the U.S." then?

I had the impression it's the other way around, and ad blockers have much higher adoption in the U.S. so i'm interested.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#73

Post by jamiesonbecker »

What concerns me most here is not that FB is going to force ads, but that this sets both a precedent and a HOWTO manual on how to do it. (i.e., same-domain, random JS names, same-site URL redirects, etc.)

It won't be long before EVERYONE follows FB's lead and proxied attack vectors will simply be the norm.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#74

Post by gramstrong »

lopatin wrote: post #45
deanCommie wrote: post #7

They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. As long as they don't try to force some sort of legislation on how people can use their internet connection, and their internet browser to fetch and display content, there's no problem. The real problem is Facebook is already full of advertising disguised as content. From sponsored posts to content from things you "like". So I'm kind of surprised…

Serious question: Why do you block FB ads? I wouldn't say that FB ads are any more disguised as content as, say, newspaper ads. And follow up: If FB decided to shut down some features to ad-blocking users, do you think that would be unfair?

Facebook already owns my personal data and any content that I publish. Why should I also have to look at ads?

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#75

Post by recursive »

aantix wrote: post #6

FB can't win this cat and mouse game. If the ads are to be distinguishable then there will be inherent properties that will lead to them getting blocked.

I think you're making some assumptions here.

The logical end-game is that FB writes their own rendering engine in javascript and targets a single canvas element, handling all the interaction events themselves. In fact, I think it can go significantly further than that. Ad blockers will need to get much fancier to deal with that kind of weaponized ad delivery.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#76

Post by ultramancool »

ruste wrote: post #52
Leynos wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock can already do this (I use it for hiding the Twitter "while you were away" nonsense), although I suspect that the next step is Facebook scrambling DOM classes and ids with no discernable pattern.

Then we can possibly block them by matching structural elements?

Yeah, or visual, anything with this CSS attributes applied (so even if they randomize names it can still be blocked) to it or something. Maybe even the element at this rendered location, which would pretty much guaranteed kill them unless they wanted to change ad locations randomly. In any case this is a pretty trivial problem.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#77

Post by tomjen3 »

pseudointellect wrote: post #65
Leynos wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock can already do this (I use it for hiding the Twitter "while you were away" nonsense), although I suspect that the next step is Facebook scrambling DOM classes and ids with no discernable pattern.

"while you were away" nonsense? A feature that shows you popular tweets from only people you follow. How is that nonsense?

Because thats my twitter feed. Really I don't follow more people than i can keep up with, so I want to read _all_ their tweets.

Which is apparently a usage pattern nobody at twitter gets.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#78

Post by douche »

pseudointellect wrote: post #65
Leynos wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uBlock can already do this (I use it for hiding the Twitter "while you were away" nonsense), although I suspect that the next step is Facebook scrambling DOM classes and ids with no discernable pattern.

"while you were away" nonsense? A feature that shows you popular tweets from only people you follow. How is that nonsense?

There are people that would like Twitter to just be a straight-up, chronological feed of tweets from people that you follow.

I'd love it if the infinite scrolling shit went away and I could look at tweets by last hour, last 12 hours, last 24 hours, etc, and then paginate by day after that.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#79

Post by jamiesonbecker »

You know, I don't mind Google search ads or even static display ads (ie BuySellAds). And even FB's somewhat annoying and usually poorly targeted display ads don't bother me too much, since they don't slow me down and (very) occasionally actually show me something of interest.

I draw the line with potential attack vectors/XSS injections, interstitials, youtube video ads, ads that keep me or slow me down from accessing content, auto-starting video, ad-block blocking interstitials, etc.

I can't imagine that I'm in a tiny minority, so why isn't there a uBlock list that only blocks the worst ads? (no, I'm not talking about ABP here.. but an actual privacy-aware ad list.)

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#80

Post by balabaster »

chollida1 wrote: post #24

> Facebook’s change will open up more online ad space for it to sell, although Mr. Bosworth said that wasn’t the motivation for the move. Facebook now garners 84% of its advertising revenue from mobile devices, which are less susceptible to ad blocking than desktop devices. Something about it being difficult for a man to understand something when his salary depends on it seems appropriate here. This is what happens w…

I only have a sample size of one (me), but I left a couple of years ago and you're not getting me back with an attitude like this... I can't imagine I'm the only one, however, I'm also willing to bet that you're right often enough for this tactic to increase profits.
Post reply on HN