Live data from Hacker News

Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

wsj.com

481–490 of 504 posts

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Red is only available to a minuscule fraction of the world population, namely United States, Australia, Mexico, New Zealand and South Korea.

I would guess that's where the majority of youtube's users are. Kinda deceptive to use "world population" when that includes places like China where youtube isn't available

Yeah, who cares about Europe

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google are the one who made me install AdBlocker. I was tired of getting the same obnoxious and annoying unskippable 30 seconds ad for a long series of 45 seconds videos on youtube.

Pay for YT Red?

How? Not available in my country. I'd even pay double the price, but it's just not possible.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#483
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.

Is that bad? Or is it just different that what we are used to?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#484
post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say "what's good for Google is good for the internet", I said, in effect, "what's good for the internet is good for Google". And please do refrain from fixing my posts for me, I am perfectly capable of expressing my opinions without your assistance.

> what's good for the internet is good for Google This presumes complete congruence between these two sets, which is precisely what is being criticized above. How exactly is: " 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. " If true, good f…

Or that 'what is good for the internet' is a subset of 'what is good for Google'. Language is murky but that's a more reasonable interpretation.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#487
post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what's good for the internet is good for Google This presumes complete congruence between these two sets, which is precisely what is being criticized above. How exactly is: " 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. " If true, good f…

Or that 'what is good for the internet' is a subset of 'what is good for Google'. Language is murky but that's a more reasonable interpretation.

It's the only interpretation after the initial clarification.
Post reply on HN