127.0.0.1 www.functionalclam.com functionalclam.com
Ad blocking is under attack
111–120 of 598 posts
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#112Surely if you are truly conserned about the copyright of your work you wouldn't freely send the content to the user's device before issuing some sort of challenge e.g login at which point circumventing that becomes a crime. Websites shouldn't be allowed to dictate how the user agent decides to execute the content received. This seems like a case of wanting to have the cake and eat it too.
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#113uBlock and uMatrix have a "page blocked" function when the entire page matches a filter, could something similar be implemented for these situations?
Say, if a page requests content from these blocked domains, the ad blocker display an SSL warning-esque page that says something along the lines of "This page contains ad content protected by the DMCA. These ads may contain malicious material, and can not be safely viewed. Please alert the site owner to resolve this issue." If you want to make it really effective, you may even be able to pull contact email addresses from WHOIS data and make the contact line a mailto: URL.
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#114It's amazing that they are so uneducated about DMCA. This is called defective DMCA notice, and it should be ignored. The sender of the notice can now file a suit, since the publisher of the list is no longer under safe harbor. But they won't, since they know it is defective. And if they did, it would be thrown out with a summary judgment.
What, specifically, was defective about the notice?
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#115Store a hash of the URLs instead of the URLs themselves.
I don't see how this would work when the URL lists are full of regexps etc.
If you could make it work, you'd would wind up with some sort of source file of domains, parsed at build time to generate list of hashes that actually ship with your plugin. That source file would belong in a repo, and would still be DMCA-able in this way.
Also, this would make ad-blockers even more CPU intensive than they are.
We shouldn't have to pursue a technical solution. It's my computer, it's my internet connection. If I'm not allowed to control my own property, then the concept of property becomes meaningless.
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#116There has been a growing trend of websites that will ask me to either: a) whitelist their site in my adblocker b) or subscribe to their monthly subscription and keep reading their site with adblocker
I think it's fair game to say "Our newspaper pays for quality journalists to do quality journalism, please consider subscribing or not using an adblocker on our site".
I prefer this to the WaPo model of paywalling or having a limited number of articles.
I do object to the Bloomberg model though, where they say "We notice you're using an ad blocker, which may adversely affect the performance and content on Bloomberg.com. For the best experience, please whitelist the site."
Wth? No way. Please ask nicely, no FUD.
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#117The only way I see DMCA applying here is contributory infringement in enabling modification of the page. With that in mind I think the question to be answered is does a user/viewer have the right to modify a page in their own web browser or must they view the page as intended by the creators? You can get in to technicalities then like are Links creators committing contributory infringement, but I'm not sure that's he…
I don't know, but should a user be in control of his own computer and screen?
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet your evidence is glued to the bottom of the discussion because you called him a fag. You've only degraded the conversation.
Only to oversensitive children who can't handle the word fag.
Ok, you're clearly a free thinker, which is nice. I think you mean well.
The problem is, society doesn't care. You're not allowed to mean well in this context. It's like being a heretic during the inquisition, then trying to argue that you're actually the good kind of heretic, the kind that believes in kindness and compassion even though you reject god. It doesn't compute.
Your options are to martyr yourself and be excluded, or conform while trying to be subversive in other ways. The former hasn't worked very well.
Your original contribution was valuable. It was excluded solely for your language. I would recommend trying again, and let readers decide for themselves. We're pretty good at reading between the lines here -- it isn't reddit. You don't usually have to be explicit, and we like drawing our own conclusions.
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#119127.0.0.1 www.functionalclam.com functionalclam.com
There's quite a few domains that host the same site, so it might be most effective to block it at the ip level: 104.198.107.72
Re: Ad blocking is under attack
#120Personally, this could be a real problem, if Ad services decide to pry open the doors on our ability to deny them our screen real estate. I block Ads, primarily due to the fact that I don't want my web surfing history and behaviors captured by some uncontrollable mob a ad-servers. Further, most advertisements are akin to the dreaded tag of old! animated, ugly, and obtrusive. We are coming to a point in the Internets…
>allow the "information consumer" to directly reward the "information producer"
That's what paywalls are.