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

251–260 of 356 posts

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

#251

Post by krick »

downandout wrote: post #36

The article puts a significant emphasis on the idea that bulletproof ad-blocking technology, assuming that's what this turns out to be in practice, will work long-term becuase of legal restrictions imposed by the FTC. If Google, Facebook, or other multi-billion dollar entities detect an existential threat arising from this or any other technology, rest assured that the laws will change as quickly as is necessary to k…

The law can be passed, whatever it must be (I'm honestly struggling to imagine it), but what is it worth if you can't enforce it? Evidently some people believe they don't steal because it's illegal, but they actually do it only because they can be caught and punished, and it isn't worth the hassle. If we are talking about some abstract computing environment and not just some proprietary, DRM-bound OS — I can chose to show on the screen whatever the fuck I want, if I can watch some movie at all, I also can watch it in vertically-flipped sepia mode, with whichever parts of the picture blacked-out. Same with any content. It may be illegal, but you cannot verify it, and then prove I did it on purpose.

I think solution will be found, but it more likely will be technological. There's no such thing as "end to the arms race". Never can be, almost by definition.

That been said, the "news" here isn't even that much sensational. Just vice.com, as usual. Journalists, eh. The most obvious thing is that CV-based solution, while being buzz-wordy and fashionable isn't preferable by any means: for me the main point of blocking ads is not "hiding them" (I don't even care that much), but making web-pages faster and less obtrusive, which requires blocking ads before they are loaded.

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

#252

Post by visarga »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #2

What would a post-ad-supported web looks like? Only selling user data without a way to use it to target ads? Consumer software that isn't free? Sock puppet marketing run rampant? It would sure be a different world.

> What would a post-ad-supported web looks like?

It was possible, even though most people disagreed at the time, to make open source thrive and write the largest, most complete encyclopedia. Stackoverflow filled with answers without pay.

An ad-free world would be ok, people are creative, we can make our own stuff. I, for example, read mostly comment threads, research papers and watch user made videos. We don't need their content and ads at all.

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

#253

Post by srtjstjsj »

pducks32 wrote: post #231
shouldbworking wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I unfortunately agree with you 100%. Theres too much money tied up in advertising for it to ever go away. Google is the greatest conglomeration of Nobel worthy scientists and engineers in the last century. And their entire organization is built on advertising. After creating the best search engine and email system, they created the best web browser and most popular operating system in the world. All of this for the s…

I believe that distinction still goes to University of Chicago.

Right. There is no Nobel Prize for mathematics, computer science, or engineering, which are Google's primary fields.

Although Google deserves an Economics prize for essentially inventing adtech

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

#254

Post by srtjstjsj »

narrowrail wrote: post #195
brianwawok wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a musician clearly put that on the package of a CD, why not? I dont have a constitutional right to buy an artist's CD.

Instead of making shit up about what you think makes sense, please familiarize yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

Instead of cursing, read the link you posted. FSD is about disposing of a physical artifact, not how a licensed work is used, broadcast, or performed.

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

#255

Post by srtjstjsj »

philipkglass wrote: post #90
IIIIIIIIIIII wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You assume ads will be recognizable as such, but even today we have ads that few people recognize. From waves of reddit /r/funny posts about certain sitcoms or sugary beverages to product placements in articles, shows, films to magazine and news articles, not always recognizable as ads because often they are not actually ads but actual articles that only happen to mention some products. Very nice for publishers who g…

I am fine with ads that are subtle enough to pass by an AI guardian. What I want to kill is stuff that dominates the page space, can't be ignored, follows you down the page as you scroll, autoplays video, runs so many scripts that my cooling fan spins up to full speed... I don't object to the existence of advertising. I object to advertising that is intrusive and/or resource-intensive enough to impair site usability.…

I'm more concerned about ads that subtly and insidously impair my life, than ads that overtly impair a website.

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

#256

Post by avaer »

Prediction: AI ad blockers become accurate and automatic enough; ads mutate into AI-based transformation of content to include paid placements.

The price of the news article or Youtube video of the future is that when you see someone drinking a Pepsi, you can't be sure if they ever actually did that. Or whether your friends saw the Pepsi when they watched the same thing in the other room.

And thus ad blockers cease to make sense; you can no longer tell what you'd be missing if you used them unless you're the centralized corporation that hoards this data.

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

#257

Post by srtjstjsj »

flubert wrote: post #17
throwaway13337 wrote: post #2

What would a post-ad-supported web looks like? Only selling user data without a way to use it to target ads? Consumer software that isn't free? Sock puppet marketing run rampant? It would sure be a different world.

How does HN pay the server bills, etc.? Is it essentially paid for as a marketing / recruiting aid out of ycombinator funds? Or is it a charity paid for by PG?

PG has explained that HN is an ad for YC, both indirectly, and directly (YC companies inject "sponsored posts" into HN frontpage, to advertise jobs.)

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

#258

Post by srtjstjsj »

scottlegrand2 wrote: post #201

Google doesn't seem to like stuff like this: https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2017/01/05/adnauseam_expel...

AdNauseum spams clicks to ad servers, which is likely why it was blocked from Chrome.

Google doesn't block uBlock, for example.

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

#259

Post by Myrmornis »

uncensored wrote: post #181
downandout wrote: post #36

The article puts a significant emphasis on the idea that bulletproof ad-blocking technology, assuming that's what this turns out to be in practice, will work long-term becuase of legal restrictions imposed by the FTC. If Google, Facebook, or other multi-billion dollar entities detect an existential threat arising from this or any other technology, rest assured that the laws will change as quickly as is necessary to k…

How can anyone prevent me from coding an ML-based ad blocker and releasing it as open source and as something that would install between the broswer and the network?

They can't but very few people would use it if it is (a) illegal and (b) some weird geek thing, so it would not have much cultural or economic impact.

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

#260

Post by Myrmornis »

visarga wrote: post #252
throwaway13337 wrote: post #2

What would a post-ad-supported web looks like? Only selling user data without a way to use it to target ads? Consumer software that isn't free? Sock puppet marketing run rampant? It would sure be a different world.

> What would a post-ad-supported web looks like? It was possible, even though most people disagreed at the time, to make open source thrive and write the largest, most complete encyclopedia. Stackoverflow filled with answers without pay. An ad-free world would be ok, people are creative, we can make our own stuff. I, for example, read mostly comment threads, research papers and watch user made videos. We don't need t…

In an ad-free world, only the affluent members of society would pay for access to intelligent journalism. The rest of society would be a mixture of information-starved, and fed information by special interest groups that provide content more cheaply than the paywalls.

EDIT: Just to be clear, my own opinion is that online advertising is a horrifically ugly, cynical blight on the human experience, which causes huge amounts of unintelligent visual content to be put in front of billions of human brains. But an ad-free future is hugely problematic for the maintenance of a well-informed society, and we have seen where a dumb electorate gets us.

Post reply on HN