Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser • Hacker News Board

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#401

Post by _jal » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 1:54 PM UTC

mseebach wrote: post #264

pdog wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's far more likely that Chrome's ad-blocking feature will be similar to the implementation of content blockers in Safari (introduced at a WWDC 2015 session)[1][2]. The new model for content blockers in Safari is faster and a lot more memory efficient because they're compiled into byte code. Content blockers are also more secure and better for privacy because they have no knowledge of the browsing that users are doi…

It's pretty clear that Google's strategy is that making the web better for everyone and everything is what will grow their ad business long term, rather than violently shoving as many ads as possible into their users faces as fast as possible. It's also pretty clear that they are capable of pursuing a long term strategy over chasing short-term cash.

> It's pretty clear that Google's strategy is that making the web better for Google

FIFY.

I have no idea why the belief that "what's good for Google is good for the internet" persists - those days are long past. Google is best understood as a huge surveillance operation with bait services attached.

The obvious reason for them to push their own ad blocker seems most likely; it is to suck the oxygen out of the space by exploiting their privileged position as a browser maker to destroy 3rd parties that can block their ads. The ad blocker-makers are tiny, fragmented and unfortunately muddled with some crappy products that sell whitelist entries; this is a good time for Google to try to knife them, before a market leader emerges.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#402

Post by nashashmi » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 1:58 PM UTC

tyingq wrote: post #362

mseebach wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty clear that Google's strategy is that making the web better for everyone and everything is what will grow their ad business long term, rather than violently shoving as many ads as possible into their users faces as fast as possible. It's also pretty clear that they are capable of pursuing a long term strategy over chasing short-term cash.

It also doesn't hurt that Google will be able to control what is considered an "ad" and what isn't. Are Google product listings ads? Google flight results? Featured destinations?

Interesting Question.

My Take: Redefine what ad means for web browsing, e.g. any information coming from a third party like iframes. All other types of information, paid or not paid, is part of the web page and not worth blocking.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#403

Post by etruong42 » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:00 PM UTC

"Advertising company will block ads"?

or is it

"Advertising company will block ads (obviously except its own)"? "Content providers - use Google's ad network if you want to make sure you get ad revenue from Chrome!"

Will Google try to remain "fair"? Does the profit-maximizing moves align with "fairness"?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#404

Post by TheKarateKid » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:04 PM UTC

etatoby wrote: post #284

tannhaeuser wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

What Eyeo is doing amounts to theft or blackmail: Pay us or have your revenue reduced.

They are a venture-funded company, so they are in it for more than the community, and can find other ways to monetize their service.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#405

Post by c3833174 » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:04 PM UTC

pluma wrote: post #308

mike-cardwell wrote: post #271

Maybe time to stop using and recommending Chrome? I heard of this browser called "Firefox" which isn't developed by an advertising company.

As a web developer you can take my Chrom(e|ium) from my cold dead hands. I tried out Firefox for a week this year and the experience didn't come anywhere close to that of using Chrome, not only for development but also as a user. Heck, even Electrolysis is still a mess with half the extensions still blocking it.

Aren't the developers tools part of webkit and available in any related browser?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#406

Post by TheKarateKid » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:06 PM UTC

m-p-3 wrote: post #217

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.

Google will probably do it in a very open way like they do when they try to enforce other web standards.

They will probably clearly post criteria for what makes an ad acceptable or not and state that Chrome will block it if it doesn't meet them. Or maybe Chrome will show them but somehow punish the webmaster like they do to sites that don't use HTTPS or have mobile friendly pages.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#407

Post by khana » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:09 PM UTC

mseebach wrote: post #264

pdog wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's far more likely that Chrome's ad-blocking feature will be similar to the implementation of content blockers in Safari (introduced at a WWDC 2015 session)[1][2]. The new model for content blockers in Safari is faster and a lot more memory efficient because they're compiled into byte code. Content blockers are also more secure and better for privacy because they have no knowledge of the browsing that users are doi…

It's pretty clear that Google's strategy is that making the web better for everyone and everything is what will grow their ad business long term, rather than violently shoving as many ads as possible into their users faces as fast as possible. It's also pretty clear that they are capable of pursuing a long term strategy over chasing short-term cash.

That, my friend, is the money shot. Shrewdness that only #corporate can exude.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#408

Post by khana » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:10 PM UTC

QuinnyPig wrote: post #215

sounds wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And duefully not ruefully so.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#409

Post by kibwen » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:12 PM UTC

jaipilot747 wrote: post #269

bmurphy1976 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, disable javascript by default. It's really easy to turn it on per-site using the brave button in the toolbar. The single best improvement I've made to my mobile browsing experience in years wasn't getting a new faster phone, it was installing Brave and disabling javascript.

For Firefox on Android I've been using JavaScript Toggle Enabled [1] for a while. Does what it says on the tin. [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/addon/toggle-javasc...

And if someone's too lazy to install an add-on or on an unfamiliar computer, disabling Javascript is a simple as going to about:config, typing in "java", and double-clicking "javascript.enabled" to set it to false.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#410

Post by kesor » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:14 PM UTC

What about the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB)?

According to wikipedia they have criticized Microsoft for enabling Do Not Track by default in Internet Explorer 10.

They also went against Mozilla for planning to turn on blocking of 3rd party HTTP cookies in Firefox.

They even blocked AdBlock to attend an event of theirs.

So I am sure they will just LOVE that Google is making all of its competitors dance to the IAB's tune. I wonder who is pulling the strings behind IAB when Google goes and does something like this.