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

Ad blocking is under attack

blog.adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 598 posts

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#351

Post by nkkollaw »

mod wrote: post #208
nkkollaw wrote: post #101

I didn't get what the hell happened. So, Admiral—an anti-adblocker company—contacted EasyList and told them to remove a domain from their list. This domain was a server they needed for their anti-adblocker platform to work. EasyList told Admiral that they would only do it if GitHub agreed, so Admiral contacted GitHub and the domain was removed from the EasyList list after GitHub told EasyList they should comply. The…

Frankly parts of this summary sound like the Admiral spin on things. > So, Admiral—an anti-adblocker company—contacted EasyList and told them to remove a domain from their list. In reality, a new Github account made a comment on a commit. That account had no identifying details to link them to a company, person, or anything else. For all intents and purposes, it was nobody. The account is @dmcahelper on Github. It ha…

Oh, no... Now I'm confused again :-/

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#353

Post by djsumdog »

geekamongus wrote: post #222
djsumdog wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many cases of DMCA abuse, and it'd be nice if someone had the resources to go after these, get them fined and help set a precedent to prevent further abuse. Unfortunately, that probably cost more than it's worth.

EFF?

I mean, the EFF has offered to assist in this case, but it will probably be solved with a simple cease and desist letter.

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#354

Post by pishpash »

dangrossman wrote: post #267
cwkoss wrote: post #193

Everyone should contact their investors. "Your portfolio company @getadmiral is committing fraud by filing false DMCA requests. Can you fix this?" Birchmere Ventures Florida Gulfshore Capital Florida Institute for the Commercialization of Public Research Mosley Ventures New World Angels https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/admiral-2#/entity If they are made aware a portfolio company is committing fraud, hopefully…

I'm not convinced people that do this wouldn't be making an arse out of themselves. No lawyers have appeared in here to say that anything fraudulent has happened. The DMCA does prohibit dissemination of any software whose purpose is to circumvent technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. If the domain we're talking about is key to such technical measures, then distributing software that blocks…

EasyList is not software. It's just a fracking list. Is it a DCMA violation to state factually, as I am doing now, that functionalclam.com is a so-called "access control" domain?

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#356

Post by okreallywtf »

exabrial wrote: post #44
nilved wrote: post #3

The DMCA only applies to the US. Fork the repo and move on. It's time to forget about American hosting.

Sad but true :( If we could only remove the logjam in congress right now to get some real work done... currently the two parties are deadlocked in a power struggle and have completely forgotten why they're there.

Do you have some good examples of what people would consider obstructionism coming from the Democrats? Its easy to find over Obama's 8 years, but how much consistent obstructionism have the Democrats engaged in? Every single minor thing under Obama was an absolute catastrophe, every budget every debt ceiling, pretty much no matter what. For some reason both parties get equal "credit" for the lack of progress but I can't personally see it that way though I try to have an open mind.

When having a discussion with someone about obstructionism I like to point to instances on both sides, and if it seems one side has twice as many that make a difference to me and I refuse do acknowledge that they are truly the same, numbers matter.

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#358

Post by [deleted] »

djsumdog wrote: post #200
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's their fault for delivering data they want restricted. I'm under no obligation to make every HTTP request they want me to or execute any untrusted JavaScript. Nor am I obligated to render their HTML as intended. If they want these things then they need every user to enter onto a binding contract agreeing to those terms.

ah, but you might be. This gets into a crazy area where we're talking about some entity offering up information via HTTP and you choosing how to represent that data. You could use Lynx, Firefox, Chrome, IE or even just browse everything with Python/BeautifulSoup in a console. Does the provider get to chose how you represent that data? Well it turns out they kinda do. Sites have terms of service people supposedly agre…

[deleted]

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#359

Post by smegel »

smegel wrote: post #350

What is the IP range of these bastards so I can at least add them to PeerBlock?

So there is a Chrome extensions called Domain Blocker, useful to add your own custom domains.

Question is, what else is missing from Ad Blockers that I should add (apart from these *)?

Re: Ad blocking is under attack

#360

Post by okreallywtf »

exabrial wrote: post #168
zanny wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> currently the two parties are deadlocked in a power struggle You mean since about 1790? There have always been two parties in congress (minus the era of good feelings) and they have always had opposing ideology, and have almost always blocked one another's proposals. It is very naive to think the current Republican congress is anything different or new. Their inaction is intentional - they need to pass their anti-c…

> It is very naive to think the current Republican congress is anything different or new The Democrats are doing now what the Republicans did for the last 8 years. And I imagine in 7 years the opposite will happen.

Are they really though? Is it obstructionism to vote no on something that you wouldn't have voted yes on even if it had come from your own party? Voting no on a healthcare bill that has been given a terrible score by the CBO and most healthcare groups and is going to increase the number of uninsured by millions [1] is not obstructionism.

The ACA was debated and discussed for over a year, it was very moderate compared to what most liberals would have wanted and the democrats had to make concessions [0] just to get 1 or 2 votes and those who voted against it hadn't bothered really to propose anything to the contrary. The repeal plans were rushed, were going to hurt tons of people [1]

Obstructionism is taking something that would usually be a no-brainer or that were your party to have suggested it would have sailed through and turning into a crusade and I haven't seen any of that, unless you can point it out for me.

[0] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/health-care-concessions-irking-l...

[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/19/cbo-...

Post reply on HN