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

Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 504 posts

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#211

Post by ashark »

taurath wrote: post #91
pookeh wrote: post #43

Hmm... Step 1. Surprise the world with better ad blocking tech than what currently exists. Step 2. When trust in tech is established, start blocking ads from other ad networks by calling them foul. Do this slowly so it's not obvious. Step 3. Wait for customers of other ad networks to notice their ads are not effective. Step 4. Steal customers...Profit.

Thats just mutually assured destruction - all IE/edge browsers would start blocking all google ads, firefox would block everyone, chrome would black all not google ads, and half the internet economy collapses

My guess is any such collapse (if it could even happen, sans some pretty serious privacy-protecting regulation) would be very temporary. Free ad- and spying-supported services make all sorts of other business models very difficult or untenable (see, for example, private, local voice recognition—why offer that product when you'll surely fail because the spytastic Google/Amazon/Apple/Microsoft offerings are free?) and even weaken the motivation for community-driven and Free, open source competition. Those other things would fill the void left by the death (please oh please) of the spy/ad economy. Hell, traditional non-spying ads might even make a comeback.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#212

Post by nickpsecurity »

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

"Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use their built in blocker rather than downloading a third party extension which would highly likely block there ads."

Probably a good call. I've actually suggested they do this before. I doubt it made it to them given it was on a private forum. It's amusing to see it happening, though. It's an extension of monopolistic practices where one blocks out all competition to give their own self an advantage.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#213

Post by derefr »

gcb0 wrote: post #199
derefr wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All what work required? Proxying is an OS-level concern, not a browser-level concern. You set it up in your OS's control panel. The browser doesn't get to be a part of that workflow, so it can't make it annoying.

You are ignoring having a proxy in the first place. Compare adblocking today: step 1, search for extension. Step 2, install extension. Step 3, there is no step 3. Now convince your parents to install a proxy, then proceed to explain they can have it on each machine (don't forget phones and tablets!) or centrally on the network (now don't forget to explain about local network while at home versus 4g when they are away…

You're trying to make it sound more complicated by bringing up complex setups that novice users wouldn't need anyway.

The simple workflow:

Step 1. search for "ad-blocker" on your OS's app store/package manager;

Step 2. choose one [that happens to be a proxy daemon]; hit install.

Step 3. Enter your password when the app asks for admin permission to finish installing (i.e. to install the proxy daemon as a background service, and autoconfigure your OS proxy settings. But you don't need to be aware of that.)

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#214

Post by _Wintermute »

ziikutv wrote: post #195
colordrops wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Naw, Google has precedent for this sort of behavior, going so far as removing plugins from their web store and quietly uninstalling them from Chrome with no notification when the plugin interfered with their business model. They actively uninstalled video download plugins without notification to the user a couple years back. Nefarious.

* Download Ublock zip * Enable Developer Options * Add Ublock package zip * Enable in Incognito as well TL;DR: Them removing it would be a dick move, but not end of the world. We can still install any packages we want.

You can also use other web browsers.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#215

Post by QuinnyPig »

sounds wrote: post #189
QuinnyPig wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine this wouldn't lead to one hell of an antitrust lawsuit...

I honestly doubt Google has thought of this. Their modus operandi appears to be (1) launch edgy experimental stuff, (2) forget it exists, (3) be reminded it exists, (4) ruin it by killing it or rewriting it.

I can't shake the feeling that virtually every product decision at Google is made by an engineer.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#216

Post by LeoNatan25 »

natoliniak wrote: post #204
joe_the_user wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love a blocker that just stopped pop-up and display adds. They make a lot of sites literally unusable. I don't mind ordinary display adds, I even like them in the sense that I like a web model that's sustainable.

Yep, we all have to eat, so i make a conscientious effort not to block ads, unless they are abusive (in particular autoplay and popups). To make most commercial websites usable, I simply disabled Autoplay in FF which silenced the most abusive screaming video ads and made surfing the web pleasant again. (about:config and set media.autoplay.enabled;false)

Oh yes, a lot of good it will do you, blocking ads after they infect you with malware. Let many starve; I'm not willing to risk it for the hunger of people that cannot find a sustainable business model other than advertisement garbage.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#217

Post by m-p-3 »

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

IMO it could be a dangerous move for them, especially if they mostly block their competitor's ads and land themselves in an antitrust lawsuit or something similar.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#218

Post by helloka »

altern8tif wrote: post #184
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On mobile Chrome does not support extensions while Firefox does. Recently on acquiring a new phone I used Chrome for a few days -- I had entirely forgotten how terrible the user-experience is without UBlock!

Go with Brave on mobile ( https://www.brave.com/ ). They've got an ad-blocker built in.

The top 5 mobile browsers all allow ad blockers except Chrome. Samsung Internet which is based on the same chromium engine as chrome has had a similar ad block model as Safari for over 1 year now (and is the default browser on Samsung Galaxy devices - https://medium.com/samsung-internet-dev/think-you-know-the-t... )

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#219

Post by kesor »

aesthetics1 wrote: post #12

"In one possible application Google is considering, it may choose to block all advertising that appears on sites with offending ads, instead of the individual offending ads themselves. In other words, site owners may be required to ensure all of their ads meet the standards, or could see all advertising across their sites blocked in Chrome." I like this approach. It punishes site owners for running malicious or badly…

The biggest ad company blocking all of its competitors for 50% of internet users, and you like this?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#220

Post by [deleted] »

taylorbuley wrote: post #120
aesthetics1 wrote: post #12

"In one possible application Google is considering, it may choose to block all advertising that appears on sites with offending ads, instead of the individual offending ads themselves. In other words, site owners may be required to ensure all of their ads meet the standards, or could see all advertising across their sites blocked in Chrome." I like this approach. It punishes site owners for running malicious or badly…

Regarding Google setting policy, it reminds me of a story about a floating advertisement of ours that accompanied the customer as they scrolled down the page reading an article. An AdSense robot flagged us two times for violating policies regarding "calling attention" to advertising because of this "sticky" ad unit. I appealed, didn't work, and had to roll back AdSense lest our company get banned. In a later conversa…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN