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

211–220 of 462 posts

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#211

Post by ultramancool »

corford wrote: post #202
cgriswald wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, proxying is basically pointless. At that point, it would be better for the site and for the advertisers (and users who don't block ads) for the site to simply self-report. At least then they avoid the extra overhead and load times (which might, btw, be detectable by ad blockers). Alternatively, advertisers could host a server on the site's domain. A subdomain or specific path would be easily blocked, but a ra…

Yeah, this is how I envisage it. Publisher gets a docker image (or whatever) from the ad-network and hosts it internally on their network. Then you just need to map a random path from nginx/haproxy. Client IP can be passed through too.

I can't see that working out well, it'd just be way too easy to cheat, you could fake any IP you wanted, pretend to be connecting from the regular consumer ISPs and generate fake hits, fake clicks and otherwise easily steal from the ad network. This will never happen, it's a non-starter. They have enough problems with fake clickers already. There's no way to pass it using a reverse proxy, docker image, whatever, where the hosting website doesn't have ultimate control over the data they provide to the ad network.

Basically if this happens I'm switching my career to stealing from ad networks for fun and profit.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#212

Post by corford »

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.

Security is a problem but my guess is publishers will care about profit first and worry about security later.

Other than proxying I can't see how advertisers and publishers solve the ad-block problem without completely rethinking how ads are bought,sold,tracked and delivered.

Proxying seems to be one of the lowest-friction ways for them to continue business as usual, security be damned.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#213

Post by alkonaut »

recursive wrote: post #75
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.

Couldn't Facebook just stop serving ads on their own site, and instead only use FB to collect data which is sold to third parties? They have a goldmine for data that should be easy to monetize without having to show ads themselves.

FB is a too simple target for ad-blocking so FB should just admit defeat and sell the info for use in advertising elsewhere. (I have no idea of whether it's economically comparable as a business model compared to in-FB ads though of course).

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#214

Post by Yhippa »

johndavidback wrote: post #164
natrius wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you allow targeted ads into your life, you're putting changes in your behavior on the market each time you touch a device. Those behavior changes are intended to make you give the buyer more money than they paid. The market will find every flaw in your psychology that can be used to take money from your pocket. These flaws exist: Las Vegas is built on them. Targeted ads are the Las Vegas of the mind.

That's all well and good, but a key distinction here is that you are using Facebook for absolutely no out-of-pocket expenditure. Going to Vegas costs actual dollars. I suppose a stark, diametric alternative to being forced to view targeted ads would be Facebook as a paid subscription service. It's the age old issue of 'Someone has to pay for this party.'

I do pay for Internet access, devices, and power to use Facebook. I take time out of my day to post content that users might go to Facebook to see.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#215

Post by ominous »

johndavidback wrote: post #164
natrius wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you allow targeted ads into your life, you're putting changes in your behavior on the market each time you touch a device. Those behavior changes are intended to make you give the buyer more money than they paid. The market will find every flaw in your psychology that can be used to take money from your pocket. These flaws exist: Las Vegas is built on them. Targeted ads are the Las Vegas of the mind.

That's all well and good, but a key distinction here is that you are using Facebook for absolutely no out-of-pocket expenditure. Going to Vegas costs actual dollars. I suppose a stark, diametric alternative to being forced to view targeted ads would be Facebook as a paid subscription service. It's the age old issue of 'Someone has to pay for this party.'

But the party has no justification to exist other than someone wants to be paid for it. Close it down, if you can't force me to pay.

Keep trying.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#217

Post by dingaling »

johndavidback wrote: post #164
natrius wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you allow targeted ads into your life, you're putting changes in your behavior on the market each time you touch a device. Those behavior changes are intended to make you give the buyer more money than they paid. The market will find every flaw in your psychology that can be used to take money from your pocket. These flaws exist: Las Vegas is built on them. Targeted ads are the Las Vegas of the mind.

That's all well and good, but a key distinction here is that you are using Facebook for absolutely no out-of-pocket expenditure. Going to Vegas costs actual dollars. I suppose a stark, diametric alternative to being forced to view targeted ads would be Facebook as a paid subscription service. It's the age old issue of 'Someone has to pay for this party.'

> but a key distinction here is that you are using Facebook for absolutely no out-of-pocket expenditure

Here's my perspective: I would pay for an ad-free subscription, but they don't offer one. They literally will not take the money I have to offer.

Imagine walking into Stabucks and having them refuse to take your money but instead handing you a coffee and a booklet of ads. Is it bad to throw the ads in the bin? Would the barista become angry and start shouting ads at you too? Or, more likely, ask you not to come back?

Note: I don't use Facebook on the principle that they want to commoditise me instead of taking my money, but I see nothing wrong with blocking their ads should someone not hold that principle.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#218

Post by idlewords »

blahi wrote: post #201
idlewords wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they encourage us to use them and make them available for free.

It is available on the condition that you are served ads alongside content.

No one is ever obligated to view ads. I'm not stealing from the billboard company because I keep my eyes on the road, and I'm not a bad person because I mute the television every five minutes when NBC runs ads for things I don't want during the Olympics.

The browser is our user agent. Facebook can serve whatever it wants, but we're under no contractual or moral obligation to look at it.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#219

Post by spriggan3 »

malchow wrote: post #61

I do not think that ad blockers can win this cat and mouse game. Ads don't annoy a large-enough percentage of humans. And the ad industry is the lifeblood of several other business communities, each of which is many times the size of the ad blocking industry. I had lunch with one well respected publishing CEO last week, who told me that his single largest advertiser was Smuckers. The peanut butter maker. Smuckers is…

> Ads don't annoy a large-enough percentage of humans

Yes they do. It's just that most people don't know ad-blockers exist. I installed ublock on one of my (elderly) relative, she then recommended it to her friends. She just can't surf without it turned on now, it changed her surfing experience, for the better.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#220

Post by corford »

ultramancool wrote: post #211
corford wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is how I envisage it. Publisher gets a docker image (or whatever) from the ad-network and hosts it internally on their network. Then you just need to map a random path from nginx/haproxy. Client IP can be passed through too.

I can't see that working out well, it'd just be way too easy to cheat, you could fake any IP you wanted, pretend to be connecting from the regular consumer ISPs and generate fake hits, fake clicks and otherwise easily steal from the ad network. This will never happen, it's a non-starter. They have enough problems with fake clickers already. There's no way to pass it using a reverse proxy, docker image, whatever, wher…

True it would be an issue for CPC/CPM campaigns but less so for CPA.

Not sure what the solution would be for CPC/CPM - off the top of my head maybe a random CNAME that pointed to an ad-server controlled IP so they could cross-audit client IPs via a JS drop in file? Presumably ad-blockers would easily pick that up though.

Post reply on HN