111–120 of 273 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only reason for still using ABP is because you haven't heard of uBlock.
Or maybe because some people prefer it? I've heard of uBlock and I continue to use ABP, so I guess your theory falls flat. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, they can detect ad blockers and present a nag screen. The ad blocker can respond by defeating their detection feature. For example, it can delete the detection function before it even executes. They could circumvent that; ad blockers could nullify their fix; they could fix it again... This could go on forever. In my experience as an user, no website has ever beaten an ad blocker. It's like trying to secure a co…
I think back in the early days Hulu served their video and ads from the same url format, so you couldnt distinguish. That's not how they do it now, but back then it successfully defeated adblockers. For example, if you were watching a TV show, it would give you a playlist of video segments and ads, all having random urls (hulu.com/ ). You couldn't tell which was an ad and which was the real video, so adblockers could…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read the README. ABP sold out a while back and now shows ads on certain websites who pay money to ABP. uBlock Origin doesn't show ads on any website unless you specifically allow it.
This was also mentioned in the article. ABP still allows you to block those whitelisted ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe because some people prefer it? I've heard of uBlock and I continue to use ABP, so I guess your theory falls flat. :)
ryuuchin wasn't suggesting people like you don't exist, just that such people are not reasonable. Theory holds.
Theory does not hold.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Those are voluntary services; the free market can regulate this just fine. It would be different if the government were requiring the use of those services.
> the free market can regulate this just fine Except that it doesn't. Not everybody is expert enough to evaluate the risks of trading their data. Even if everybody was an expert, Google and Facebook are quasi-monopolies that are hard to avoid due to network effect and peer pressure. They play major roles in modern society so regulating them /in some ways/ seems warranted.
It sounds like you just like both services a lot and want the government to step in so you can have your cake and eat it too.
Since this submission relates to blocking ads and trackers, I think it's worth bringing up that uBlock Origin [0] is better than Adblock Plus in (all?) ways (see the README for more details). I migrated to it a few years ago and overall I've been very happy with the outcome. I'm opposed to all tracking that isn't opt-in by default. I haven't thought about the topic at great lengths, so there may be cases which I'm fa…
I'd really love it if unlock allowed me to sync whitelisted sites like adblock plus does
IMHO, by choosing to provide their content as an HTML data stream via HTTP to the user, "Der SPIEGEL" implicitly allows to consume this content in whichever way the user sees fit, as HTML is simply a markup language that can be interpreted in various ways, and could even be read in a text editor. By trying to force the user to consume this data through a specific channel (e.g. through a standard-compliant browser wit…
Since this submission relates to blocking ads and trackers, I think it's worth bringing up that uBlock Origin [0] is better than Adblock Plus in (all?) ways (see the README for more details). I migrated to it a few years ago and overall I've been very happy with the outcome. I'm opposed to all tracking that isn't opt-in by default. I haven't thought about the topic at great lengths, so there may be cases which I'm fa…
The only reason for still using ABP is because you haven't heard of uBlock.
Although for those people I usually recommend Adguard, not Adblock plus.
> "The Claimant [Spiegel] argues that the Defendant’s [Eyeo's] business model endangers the Claimant’s existence," reads the judgment, which isn't final because it can be appealed by Spiegel. Because users aren't willing to pay for editorial content on the Web, "it is not economically viable for the Claimant to switch to this business model." In what situation is endangering someone's business model grounds for their…
Spiegel can only track you across their own site which might not tell them much about you, making the ad space less valuable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and that 10% helps develop the program Develop in what sense? uBlock origin is at least 10% better than ABP just by not doing that. The _only_ thing people want from such a program is to block all ads and trackers. That's it. That's the feature list. You decide to compromise the single goal to fund further "development"? How does that make any sense?
You need to get out of your box. Stop assuming you speak for everyone with such ridiculous statements as "the only thing people want from such a program is to block all ads and trackers." I don't give a single hoot about tracking and want quality ads. Do I not exist?
Sure, people have all sorts of weird fetishes.