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

Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 179 posts

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#71

Post by throwaway2048 »

Jimmie_Rustle wrote: post #48

I think this will be very beneficial to non-savvy web-users who may be tricked by misleading ads like the download buttons, and the like. Ads aren't really a problem for me (and I am guessing a lot of others), it's bad/misleading ads like pop-ups, auto-play video ads, etc. I think the idea to block ads that do not follow an established industry standard is definitely a step in the right direction. Savvy users will co…

Google hosts most of those download button ads...

Also the biggest source of pre-roll auto-play video ads, youtube.

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#72

Post by PrivWeeble »

jfasi wrote: post #10

> Web users will quickly recognize their only options: pay to use the internet, or uninstall the ad blockers and surf the web for free. Or they could disable Chrome ad blocking and install their ad blocker of choice. If I'm reading this correctly then no portion of the user population is hurt by this. Power with religious objections to advertising are free to continue using them. Typical users who don't care don't ha…

That's like saying antibiotics are only meant to kill the worst of one's infection. Unfortunately, there are foolish people who assume a lower dose/dosage will suffice. Even after an M.D. assesses what they need and tells them exactly what to take! Explicit warnings and education became necessary.

We have a similar problem in the "ad blocking" space. Naive users don't appreciate that there is a big difference between ad-blockers that only block "annoying" ads and ad-blockers that provide more comprehensive blocking (annoying ads and related security threats and related privacy threats). Many who want/need the stronger solution opt for the weaker solution and they are harmed by doing so. The lower efficacy "annoying ad blockers" need black box warnings.

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#73

Post by azakai »

vinceguidry wrote: post #69

>According to the Financial Times, Google will allow publishers what it’s calling “Funding Choices.” The publisher could charge the consumer a set price per page view to use third-party sites that block all advertising. Google would do the tracking of how many pages users view, and then charge them. Users could then “white list” particular sites, allowing ads to be shown on them and removing the charge. If users deci…

> I'm just absolutely silly with glee that Google finally decided to jump on it.

There is no "finally" here - this isn't new. Google Contributor is from 2014 [1].

Google and other companies have tried this idea many times already. It's true that people like you exist, but there haven't been enough to make this viable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Contributor

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#74

Post by azakai »

sumeno wrote: post #41
joeyspn wrote: post #40

I'm curious to see how Google reacts when Brendan Eich's new browser project gets traction.... "Brave Browser Will Reward Users with Ethereum-Based Tokens for Switching on Ads": https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/brave-announces-blockchain-d...

Is there any reason to think this will actually gain traction with a significant portion of the population? This seems like the kind of thing HN gushes over but the general population couldn't care less about.

Sure, that part of Brave is focused on tech people. But all these trends start with tech people - then we recommend it and install it for our friends and family.

Also, that's just part of the Brave strategy. It's going to block a lot more ads than Chrome by default. That has the potential for general appeal, not just for tech people.

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#75

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #70
vinceguidry wrote: post #69

>According to the Financial Times, Google will allow publishers what it’s calling “Funding Choices.” The publisher could charge the consumer a set price per page view to use third-party sites that block all advertising. Google would do the tracking of how many pages users view, and then charge them. Users could then “white list” particular sites, allowing ads to be shown on them and removing the charge. If users deci…

Google contributor (their implementation of this idea) only kicks in if ad sellers don't outbid you for that slot. Its a hopelessly google-myopic idea.

[deleted]

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#76

Post by vinceguidry »

azakai wrote: post #73
vinceguidry wrote: post #69

>According to the Financial Times, Google will allow publishers what it’s calling “Funding Choices.” The publisher could charge the consumer a set price per page view to use third-party sites that block all advertising. Google would do the tracking of how many pages users view, and then charge them. Users could then “white list” particular sites, allowing ads to be shown on them and removing the charge. If users deci…

> I'm just absolutely silly with glee that Google finally decided to jump on it. There is no "finally" here - this isn't new. Google Contributor is from 2014 [1]. Google and other companies have tried this idea many times already. It's true that people like you exist, but there haven't been enough to make this viable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Contributor

Nobody cares because it's not a real solution. Making content sites buy into it means only 10% of the ads I see might get mitigated. Everybody else's solution has the same problem.

It needs to be universal to be of any use to the end user. Otherwise it's only of slight use to Google, marginal use to content creators, and no use at all to consumers. That's what I'm hoping for from the new content blockers. A way to force a new order on the content world.

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#77

Post by vinceguidry »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #70
vinceguidry wrote: post #69

>According to the Financial Times, Google will allow publishers what it’s calling “Funding Choices.” The publisher could charge the consumer a set price per page view to use third-party sites that block all advertising. Google would do the tracking of how many pages users view, and then charge them. Users could then “white list” particular sites, allowing ads to be shown on them and removing the charge. If users deci…

Google contributor (their implementation of this idea) only kicks in if ad sellers don't outbid you for that slot. Its a hopelessly google-myopic idea.

Well, if I can install a secondary ad-blocker to block those ads, I'd be fine with it. The market will eventually settle around a standard rate for a piece of content and then the world can finally know the real price for ads without all the perverse incentives.

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#78

Post by russdpale »

rtkwe wrote: post #39
Animats wrote: post #17

What ads would get blocked? The ones not sold by Google, for the most part. I can see it coming - "Host on AMP, and your ads will get through". "Use Google Ads, and your ads will get through." "Pay dues to the Acceptable Ad Consortium, and your ads will get through." Look what happened with TrustE and their ratings. It started out as a good idea, and ended up as a cover for scumbags. Today, a TrustE seal has negative…

I'm a little more hopeful. They have a clear incentive to keep really bad ads off their own services because if they don't a lot of people will just reinstall another ad blocker. If I didn't have to deal with unmutable autoplaying video ads or ads spouting malware I'd be more willing to browse with a limited ad blocker.

Google will never be able to pry uBlock Origin from me! Stay away!

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#79

Post by partiallypro »

orangecat wrote: post #68
anth1988 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lead is not only factual, but greatly strengthens the points made within. Google makes the vast majority of their money off advertising and data, they are taking steps that will help them to get an even stronger hold on that market with high potential to be extremely anti-competitive.

Google makes the vast majority of their money off advertising and data By selling the service of targeting and delivering ads, not by selling personal information.

Kind of, but really they -are- selling personal information, just not outright. You advertise with Google and get to see the demos, trends, etc so you can target your own ads. It's almost like a SaaS for data mining, especially when you pair it with analytics...which of course you do, that's what goals in analytics are for.

Re: Be Careful Celebrating Google’s New Ad Blocker

#80

Post by partiallypro »

renlo wrote: post #6

> According to the Financial Times, Google will allow publishers what it’s calling “Funding Choices.” The publisher could charge the consumer a set price per page view to use third-party sites that block all advertising. Google would do the tracking of how many pages users view, and then charge them. Users could then “white list” particular sites, allowing ads to be shown on them and removing the charge. If users dec…

Maybe they will make the article views like a reverse auction system which they have in Adwords.
Post reply on HN