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

Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 356 posts

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#161

Post by jkaptur »

imglorp wrote: post #117
make3 wrote: post #75

Just change the alpha values in the `coverContainer` function in `utils.js` and it actually blocks ads. Patched `utils.js`: https://pastebin.com/YLyN2uJ8

Covering is not as good as not loading. Loading brings all the malware, the tracking, and the bandwidth/load times.

But the whole point of this approach (as I understand it) is that companies may be able to deliver the ads in the same HTTP response as the content, they may render the whole page as a , they may go to crazy lengths, but by sitting on top of all of that, this software can still block pixels that look like an ad.

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#162

Post by bduerst »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #109
drumttocs8 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see it now... "Advertisements are a form of free speech. Corporations are people too."

Advertisements, like any communication, are a form of free speech, but it'd be unprecedented to demand that anyone provide an audience for your speech. You can speak all you like; nobody is obligated to listen.

The audience isn't obligated to listen, but it's also not entitled to use content in a manner that the copyright holder doesn't want them to either.

If a copyright holder (like Forbes) stipulates that their content is paid for using ads and they won't let you consume it without looking at the ads, then you're neither obligated to or entitled to consume it.

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#163

Post by ekimekim »

iamben wrote: post #45

At risk of being very unpopular, am I the only person that doesn't mind ads? I mean some are pretty intrusive, but largely I'm happy to make the trade off. I'll look at (and maybe click on) your ad, if it means you have the cash to bring me what I want to look at. It's fantastic to think we live in a world where the web can support itself without ads, but it's not really practical, is it? Some stuff I'd support - but…

I don't mind ads in sidebars, banner ads, etc. I whitelist my adblocker and there's only three reasons I've ever blocked a site:

* The ad prevented me from getting to the content (popup modals, youtube preroll ads)

* The ad made noise (I've recently started using an autoplay-blocker which is on by default and helps with this, as well as annoying autoplay videos that aren't ads)

* The ad massively slowed down or crashed the page (for some reason, wikia seems to be particularly bad for this). This is much less common now that I have flash disabled by default.

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#164

Post by owenversteeg »

make3 wrote: post #75

Just change the alpha values in the `coverContainer` function in `utils.js` and it actually blocks ads. Patched `utils.js`: https://pastebin.com/YLyN2uJ8

Anyone know if it interferes with uBlock? I'm on mobile and can't test now.

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#165

Post by gech »

turblety wrote: post #73
jpambrun wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure Anti-ad-blocking laws are practically enforceable. Even with the ad labeling requirements relaxed, unless it is truly deceptive, a CNN could identify it just as well (or better) than we can.

Already you have restrictive software/firmware running on your computer. Look into Intel ME (Management Engine) a likely backdoor into your computer you have no control over, don't know what it does, and can not disable it. It already helps many DRM applications to restrict what content you can play and how. Legislation to disable adblocking could be reinforced already be implemented into the next generation of Intel…

Do Ryzen chips have this?

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#166

Post by orblivion »

ouid wrote: post #148
orblivion wrote: post #127

The war on ads is like the war on drugs. This is just going to create more ruthless ad cartels. There is a demand to be met, it will find its way to the consumer, even if it has to plow over 50 others in the process. The question is, what is the online ad equivalent of legalizing drugs?

in what way, except for the grammatical structure of the phrase, is the war on ads similar to the war on drugs?

As I alluded to, in both cases, there's a demand to be met, and there's a strong social resistance to having that demand to be met.

Advertisers annoy 99.9% of us, but there's the 0.1% that demand something that they don't yet know about. There's money to be made, and satisfaction to be had, if only the connection of knowledge could be made.

So I'm saying, perhaps instead of thinking in terms of blocking the knowledge, which will tend to get there one way or another, I wonder if there's a solution in terms of finding a less disruptive way to get the knowledge there. It would make advertising less lucrative.

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#167

Post by gerdesj »

downandout wrote: post #147
skybrian wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is too cynical. You can be sure there will be lobbyists involved making the case for companies affected, but this does not guarantee results . Any business plan where there's government involved is risky. Heck, even with a Republican-controlled Congress, the Republicans can't always get their agenda passed because they don't even agree among themselves what it is. Nobody can rest easy that Congress will do what…

It would be cynical in the case of lower profile companies just looking to get their way. In the case of at least two $400 billion+ companies - combined market cap of nearly $1 trillion and the bedrock our country's image of technology supremacy - the rules change. Members of Congress, senators, and many of their constituents directly or indirectly hold shares in one or both of these companies. It is unfathomable to…

"Members of Congress ... that these kinds of threats to companies like Google and Facebook would not be legislatively blocked."

and how would that affect say me (in the UK)?

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#168

Post by fkooman »

pjc50 wrote: post #101
aub3bhat wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or simply a hardened browser DMCA, with signed write-or-execute JS VM that ensures that integrity of the page as rendered cannot be messed with by some pesky extension.

.. which requires banning all existing browsers, which is something Microsoft, Apple and Google are unlikely to go along with quietly.

So, next step is DRM for webpages/content in addition to video, either you see all or nothing. The W3C is probably already running with the idea to destroy the "free" web :-)

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

#169

Post by JoshTriplett »

bduerst wrote: post #162
JoshTriplett wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertisements, like any communication, are a form of free speech, but it'd be unprecedented to demand that anyone provide an audience for your speech. You can speak all you like; nobody is obligated to listen.

The audience isn't obligated to listen, but it's also not entitled to use content in a manner that the copyright holder doesn't want them to either. If a copyright holder (like Forbes) stipulates that their content is paid for using ads and they won't let you consume it without looking at the ads, then you're neither obligated to or entitled to consume it.

Website terms of service are not law, no matter how people have abused the CFAA. You can't control how a browser displays content, whether it does so with a browser, screen reader, or musical interpretive dance.

I look forward to seeing that battle play out.

Post reply on HN