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

301–310 of 462 posts

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#301

Post by WalterSear »

maxxxxx wrote: post #294
denzil_correa wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them. Technically, Facebook could insert news feed ads like a post from one of your friend (assume that the friend has liked some page or organization). It could be tough to distinguish between ads and posts much like native advertising.

Sounds like a good application for AI to detect ads.

You wouldn't even even need that. Just a methods for identifying content and aggregating users 'votes' on them. Reach critical mass and start hiding it.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#302

Post by Paul-ish »

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.

If I include and run a script from example.com, doesn't that already happen? How else would using a CDN for, say, jQuery work?

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#303

Post by wutbrodo »

chiph wrote: post #257
legohead wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We started off nice: "Hey, you are disabling ads, please turn them on" etc. Then we offered an ad-free subscription (almost worthless). And I think we played with another idea or two, before finally going through with the blocking adblockers.

I think you missed the point of the question - people install adblockers typically because they find the ads are intrusive (full-screen graphic overlays, etc), or their machine gets infected with ad network-delivered malware. If you presented ads that were respectful to the visitor (i.e. weren't offensive) I expect the blocker escalation war would cease.

> people install adblockers typically because they find the ads are intrusive (full-screen graphic overlays, etc), or their machine gets infected with ad network-delivered malware. If you presented ads that were respectful to the visitor (i.e. weren't offensive) I expect the blocker escalation war would cease.

This is absolutely incorrect. Users may install them because they find some amount of ads to be abusive, but damn near nobody (relative to all ad blocker usage) starts out on a white list basis, and the idea that they're diligent about unblocking sites that have "good" ads that get past their blocker is just absurd.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#304

Post by fragola »

ominous wrote: post #287
nostrebored wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you against businesses being able to set their prices? They're asking you to pay the market price. If you're not fine with it, doing some unilateral haggling isn't exactly how exchanges work, just don't use their product. Using Facebook is not a right. The fact of the matter is, most people waxing poetic here about ads infringing on their rights, will still use Facebook when their adblockers don't work. They are…

I am against business trying to make me agree the price is fair. And the price of having ads displayed on my computer is too high. Ads are like a donation box, not like a price tag. Am I being forced to donate?

>Ads are a donation box, not a price tag

Well, you're certainly entitled to your own opinion. But realistically, we all consume content that is ad-supported that we might be paying for otherwise. The fact that so many ad-or-pay services exist is proof of this (Youtube with ads, Hulu with ads, etc.) The are both business models.

If you don't like the service at the price, don't buy it. Honestly, no one is forcing you and tons of people get on perfectly fine without Facebook (some people would even say they are better off without it).

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#307

Post by awad »

alkonaut wrote: post #213
recursive wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 bu…

Facebook, Google/YouTube, and Twitter to a lesser extent, command a large portion of the digital ad market due in no small part to the fact that they are also some of the largest publishers.

In other words, they make a ton of money selling ads on their own properties. Their publisher products (Adsense, DFA, Audience Network, Audience Platform) extend their reach to third parties certainly, but AFAIK each of them still make more money from their own inventory.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#308

Post by jagermo »

Ok, so here is my idea: Most adblockers use lists or block scripts that are loaded from third party sites.

If I load my ads from my own servers, using standard images or gifs, maybe have a script alter the size a few pixel each time, wouldn't that defeat most adblockers?

On the upside (for users): No external tracking through ad networks.

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#309

Post by Kalium »

hsod wrote: post #198
natrius wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook's profitability is not your problem. It's their job to figure out how to get paid. It's your job to protect your mind. Targeted ads are worse than gambling. We made sure everyone's aware of the dangers of gambling, but everyone's in the dark about targeted ads. These companies know what they're doing. If people want to portray ad blocking as stealing, so be it. Steal from them. They deserve it.

> Facebook's profitability is not your problem. No, but acting with honesty and fairness is. Facebook is asking you not to use their service if you are going to block ads. I think it's obvious that the "right" thing to do is to respect their wishes, not sneeringly defy them while using their resources and giving nothing in return.

Facebook, in a spirit of honesty and fairness, asks me nicely to look at ads when they send me HTML. I, also in a spirit of honesty and fairness, have the option of deciding what of that HTML I want to look at.

There is nothing honest or fair about dictating what happens on someone else's computer without user input. That's what malware does. Are you pro-malware?

Re: Facebook will force advertising on ad-blocking users

#310

Post by kbenson »

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…

> They are welcome to try. And I am welcome to try harder to block them.

Well, you've given them permission to try. I doubt they are giving you any such permission, so you're actually presuming quite a bit when you say you're welcome to try as well. This actually matters, because as far as the law is concerned, you don't have any right to to the content beyond what they allow you (excluding laws specific to your submitted content, depending on locality).

I understand ads and ad-blocking stir visceral reactions in people, but really, if you don't like what they are doing, you shouldn't use their service. Anything else is just enabling the behavior you dislike, as even if you are not being marketed to, you are providing a reason for other people to want to use the site that are marketed to.

Post reply on HN