Adblock Plus now sells ads

Post by cmiller1 » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 2:57 PM UTC

jagger27 wrote: post #115

thclark wrote: post #36

uBlock Origin it is! Extensions: Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpa... Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin... Opera: https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/ublock/ Microsoft Edge: https://github.com/nikrolls/uBlock-Edge#microsoft-edge

A word of warning about uBlock for those who aren't aware: uBlock Origin forked off of uBlock some time ago and left the Safari version behind. For Chrome and Firefox uBlock Origin is great, but for Safari I personally suggest Wipr[1]. 1: https://safari-extensions.apple.com/details/?id=com.giorgioc...

Post by m0nty » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 3:03 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #147

m0nty wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, look at blocking DNS as an alternative to in-browser blocking: http://www.abelhadigital.com/hostsman

Using a HOSTS file to block things while effective, is also a very bad user experience. For example, some sites won't let you in until you unblock ads. With an extension you can use the in-browser UI to whitelist that site, with a HOSTS file you'd have to figure out exactly which domains got blocked, then update the HOSTS file, and finally restart the browser & flush the DNS Cache Resolver for it to take effect. Agai…

Post by dsr_ » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 3:10 PM UTC

cptskippy wrote: post #162

pythia__ wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it unethical? What ethical principle is being violated? (These are not rhetorical questions.)

Blocking Ad is itself unethical. Ads are placed on pages to pay for the content. By blocking ads you are depriving the content creators of compensation for their work. Replacing Ads with other ads is worse because you're not only depriving a content creator of revenue but then profiting off of their work. You could argue that it amounts to theft.

Post by CaptSpify » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 3:13 PM UTC

Yuioup wrote: post #78

This is extortion, plain and simple. Essentially they're forcing advertisers to funnel all ad content through them. Good thing for uBlock Origin because otherwise they should be indicted to anti-competitive behavior. No, I don't like ads and I run uBlock Origin. I don't work for an advertising company and couldn't care less about ads. But what Adblock Plus is doing here is illegal.

Post by frandroid » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 3:15 PM UTC

jackhack wrote: post #151

pythia__ wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it unethical? What ethical principle is being violated? (These are not rhetorical questions.)

Trust. Performing the exact opposite of the stated and expected purpose of the application, for money, is a violation of trust. There is an implied belief that a product should do what it claims (and its name clearly states a purpose -- ad BLOCK), and the plain English reading of the title makes that pretty clear. Imagine a virus scanner that only blocked those viruses that didn't pay up.

    Surf the web without annoying ads!

    Can block tracking, malware domains, banners, pop-ups and video ads - even on Facebook and YouTube
    Unobtrusive ads aren't being blocked in order to support websites (configurable)
    It's free! (GPLv3)