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

281–290 of 504 posts

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#281

Post by etatoby »

untog wrote: post #183
CoryG89 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one supports uBlock. Browsers would have to specifically block the extension if they wanted to keep people from using it.

> Browsers would have to specifically block the extension if they wanted to keep people from using it. Which Google have done to other extensions many times.

Yes, it's possible—I would say probable—that after introducing their "impartial" ad blocker, whose rules for acceptable ads just so happen to allow all of their ads through, and after enabling it by default on their browser, they will actively block all other ad blockers, on "privacy and security" grounds.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#282

Post by GoToRO »

gavinpc wrote: post #9

Who is clicking on these ads, anyway? I've never understood how this adds up to profit (for the advertisers).

Most people don't even recognize the ads. They don't understand what "sponsored" means for example (and it's implications; what?! people are paying money?). This is not because they are sd. They work in totally different domains and just like we don't know the latest things in those domains, they don't know the latest in ours.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#283

Post by forvelin »

ptaipale wrote: post #267
sangnoir wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand, I doubt Google would be so bold, considering the amount of attention they are currently getting from the European Commissioner of Competition. If Marine le Pen wins on the other hand...

This might be so, but I don't see it primarily as a problem with Google. I see it as a problem with the European Union, which is too much about French policies and politics and way of political operation. Perhaps electing Le Pen might actually do some good to it by forcing others to change?

I think parent meant if LePen is elected, there won't be a EU to cause trouble in the long run?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#284

Post by etatoby »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #261
vaishaksuresh wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how you see positive in this move, but all I can think of is this. Google will enable ads from google and block everything else. This is their way of killing the competition. I think it is unfair and risky. I don't want google or anybody else deciding what is acceptable ad for me. Even if it is not distracting or passes google's standard of 'good' ad, it should still be my choice that determines if I see it or…

Exactly. Not wanting to bash Google, but it's not in their best interest to block Google Ads is it? What'll happen is that Google Ads will be served using some super-sophisticated cloaking setup making AdBlockers ineffective on all but Google Ads. Like https, this will put alternative ad networks out of business. It's not even difficult to do so, by eg. serving pages from a Google-controlled CloudFlare-like proxy ser…

> we should really come up with a community-driven criteria for Acceptable Ads

Isn't that what ABP / Eyeo is doing? You may criticize them for the fee they ask of the Ad companies to include / review their ads, but it's not like the fees are unfair or they aren't doing work that needs to be paid somehow. They even set up a non profit to deal with this matter.

> or should disable un-vetted/not-whitelisted JavaScript alltogether.

This is already being developed by the FSF as a Firefox extension. It makes the modern web completely unusable (of course) but it's the principle that counts, right?

> Like https, this will put alternative ad networks out of business.

How did https do anything like that?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#285

Post by mtgx »

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…

Ironically, this is what Microsoft should've done if it wanted to "hurt Google" years ago when it pushed for the useless Do Not Track feature by default (which advertisers were under no obligation to respect).

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#286

Post by scriptproof »

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…

If only you have read the article, it is said thay will block popups, video and other annoying ads. These things are the main incentives to install a blocker. It is a smart move, and maybe a late move.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#287

Post by felipeerias »

milkytron wrote: post #143
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…

I would love to hear/read the dialogue that occurred when the first person pitched this idea at Google. > Also since people wouldn't use third party blockers as much those companies would go out business more likely. I'm sure a few might, and it'll likely discourage others from entering the market as well. But I do think that open source alternatives would live on and continue to be used if your guess is correct. And…

– I just learned that there are people using our Web browser who don't see our ads. And even worse, they might be seeing our competitors' ads!

– Maybe we could act as gatekeepers so our competitors have to go through us to advertise on our browser? We could wrap it as "only letting in the nice ads" or whatever…

– Brilliant!

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#288

Post by LoSboccacc »

ehsankia wrote: post #206
kesor wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "ad blocker" companies will go out of business? ARE YOU INSANE?! Google is a frigging AD MONOPOLY ... its their major business for crying out loud. And the same company that controls a HUGE portion of all the Internet Ad business is creating an "Ad Blocker". And this doesn't ring any bells anywhere? No friend, they are not trying to put "ad blocker" companies out of business. They are trying to put "competing int…

I don't think it's about putting "ad blockers" out of business. Hell, they're not businesses, uBlock is OSS. I think the idea is, people get so annoyed by poor ads that is in your face that they get pushed beyond their "threshold" and get an ad blocker. If ads are used with moderation, most people won't get annoyed enough to go out of their way and install a traditional ad blocker. Bad ads ruin it for Google. They te…

Yeah I'm generally pro billboard like advertisement - websites need to earn some money off visits and that's acceptable.

Ads that drive me on a different page, cover the full page unless closed or otherwise hamper navigation unless I interact with them first can die in a firey hell.

I've uBlock but youtube and other content creators sites that so far hasn't annoyed me with ads are free to go. I.e. Looking For Group started serving to mobile page redirecting ads, so they went in the blacklist, but until then they were free to serve whatever.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#289

Post by Grue3 »

seibelj wrote: post #5

As someone who uses ublock origin and has been blocking ads for many years, I will consider turning it off if this is effective. My problem is not with ads themselves, it's with terrible ads.

You won't have the choice of turning ublock origin off when Google implements this feature. They'll remove it themselves under the guise of "replicating the functionality of the base product".

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#290

Post by mook »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #261
vaishaksuresh wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how you see positive in this move, but all I can think of is this. Google will enable ads from google and block everything else. This is their way of killing the competition. I think it is unfair and risky. I don't want google or anybody else deciding what is acceptable ad for me. Even if it is not distracting or passes google's standard of 'good' ad, it should still be my choice that determines if I see it or…

Exactly. Not wanting to bash Google, but it's not in their best interest to block Google Ads is it? What'll happen is that Google Ads will be served using some super-sophisticated cloaking setup making AdBlockers ineffective on all but Google Ads. Like https, this will put alternative ad networks out of business. It's not even difficult to do so, by eg. serving pages from a Google-controlled CloudFlare-like proxy ser…

> The real question is: are you ok with ad-financed web sites in general, but have a problem with tracking (like me)?

Turns out, that (currently) involves ad blockers. For a while, I tried to use only uMatrix (i.e. blocking third-party requests), without an ad blocker. Sites broke because they assumed they could load Google Analytics. Workaround: Install uBlock Origin, because it (like NoScript) knows how to fake out specific scripts enough that a stubbed-out version of GA is used and the rest of the page runs correctly.

Post reply on HN