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

411–420 of 504 posts

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#411

Post by dceddia »

onion2k wrote: post #336
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…

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. I think that guess is wrong. I think Google will block their own ads. There are a few reasons why; 1. They're not stupid. The amount of trust lost in a move like that would be immense. It wouldn't be worthwhile. 2. They don't need to. They just need…

> Other ad blocking technology will also block Google's tracking mechanisms, and they really don't want that to happen.

Good point. After using uBlock Origin for a while now, "ads" have become synonymous with "tracking scripts" to me. I'd bet Google's adblocker wouldn't block Google Analytics from running, like uBlock does.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#412

Post by abraves10001 »

etruong42 wrote: post #403

"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"?

I am not sure profit-maximization is ever primarily concerned with fairness. Google is probably not the exception to this. However, like many things Google this is something that will improve user experience (no more shitty, malware infested ads, by default) and undercut their competitors. So, most of their users aren't really going to be up in arms.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#413

Post by infogulch »

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.

> they are capable of pursuing a long term strategy

Except when it comes to chat/text communication. In that case they run around like chickens with their heads cut off.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#414

Post by apostacy »

etatoby wrote: post #279
apostacy wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are severely misunderstanding the situation. Google can do whatever they want. They've already demonstrated that they have no problem installing things on your computer that you never would have otherwise agreed to. That, and they don't take no for an answer with updates.

Do they? I just downgraded Chrome for Android to 56, because the latest one would crash when playing live video streams. Granted, Play Store didn't have that option, so I had to download the APK from a third-party site and disable automatic updates for it, but nothing prevented me from doing either thing.

Yes, you still can on Android. But Google has shown that they don't see anything morally wrong with using misleading updating tactics. And the range of what you have control over is shrinking.

I commented about it about a month ago[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13950975

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#415

Post by stephenr »

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…

The article clearly says it's about blocking "bad" ads, as deemed so by the ad industry.

> The ad-blocking feature, which could be switched on by default within Chrome, would filter out certain online ad types deemed to provide bad experiences for users as they move around the web.

> Unacceptable ad types would be those recently defined by the Coalition for Better Ads, an industry group that released a list of ad standards in March. According to those standards, ad formats such as pop-ups, auto-playing video ads with sound and “prestitial” ads with countdown timers are deemed to be “beneath a threshold of consumer acceptability.”

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#416

Post by madshiva »

askvictor wrote: post #51

I can only hope they are also developing a micropayment system to allow easy payment for web content. This shouldn't be too hard - they have a billing system (Google Play) already

No, reading should be free. it's not a movie, if you want learn you need to do it freely. Brave will only work for some people.

Also what about my comment? If I publish something even on Facebook why I'm not paid too? Where is the limit? If there's "nothing free" principe why people help each others on forum? (it's start to become less and less) people don't want more to do free things, but this is bad, bad because it's was about helping, information, not about payment to read crap. or steal content from other (pinterest)

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#419

Post by romanovcode »

kenshaw wrote: post #4

My cynical side can't help but think they will do this first, then later disable uBlock / other ad blockers (or the APIs they rely on) and claim that "we can do it better." I can't imagine that this isn't a violation of some kind of law (RICO, antitrust, or otherwise), but I don't imagine this would ever be prosecuted.

Exactly my thoughts.

Another reason to do so is to make sure users will not be forced to install ad-block manually therefore make sure more users see google ads. Because obviously "Google AdBlocker" will show ads from Google and partners.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#420

Post by gorhill »

Ads are a subset of a larger issue: the out of control data mining and tracking[1]. Focusing only on whether an ad is visually pleasant or not does not address the larger issue -- which larger issue is the foremost reason people should install a content blocker, to get back in the control seat of their user agent.

[1] https://twitter.com/gorhill/status/849263615634964484 => https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8ka33oUMAAGMBm.jpg:large

https://twitter.com/gorhill/status/803998582227533825 => https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyhfYyWWEAAH8zq.jpg:large

https://twitter.com/gorhill/status/649256227277537280 (visually, a page with no ads) => https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQKfGQBWoAAhNc7.png:large

Post reply on HN