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

Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

forum.palemoon.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 263 posts

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#11

Post by 4bpp »

rocky1138 wrote: post #2

Can't people just compile their own version sans-censorship?

I don't know about Pale Moon, but at least Firefox was well-known back in the day for being extremely resource-intensive to compile (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_g...) - I vaguely remember somebody talking about how they had to cross-compile to obtain the Raspberry Pi build, for instance.

Either way, per the developer's post, you can in fact just flip an about:config switch to disable the addon blacklist (not sure if this would also leave you susceptible to actual malicious addons); it's more of an issue of compliance budget/trivial inconveniences, and the implicit message of the action. (Note how the developer is very insistent about referring to AdNauseam as "malware"; if we go with the conventional definition of malware as being harmful to its user, this may paint Pale Moon as perceiving the website and/or ad network operators as being its clientele, rather than the person using the browser.)

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#12

Post by chuckdries »

na85 wrote: post #7

That AdNauseam causes potential damage to people running ads and generating revenue from ads by devaluing clicks is a feature, not a bug. My understanding of the plugin is that it views advertising as universally bad, and that if a site cannot survive without ads, it must not be worth much at all, and deserves to die. I wholeheartedly agree with this view.

Why? I work at a newspaper, we've survived on ads for decades, the way we deliver them has just changed.

Most newspapers are like this, are you saying we should not exist?

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#13

Post by addicted »

na85 wrote: post #7

That AdNauseam causes potential damage to people running ads and generating revenue from ads by devaluing clicks is a feature, not a bug. My understanding of the plugin is that it views advertising as universally bad, and that if a site cannot survive without ads, it must not be worth much at all, and deserves to die. I wholeheartedly agree with this view.

So Google, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat have no value? Because those aren't just little sites, but entire companies that have value solely because of ads. Take away ads and they don't exist.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#14

Post by belorn »

rocky1138 wrote: post #2

Can't people just compile their own version sans-censorship?

The reason people use a fork like pale moon is because they want the changes that the fork provide. If that is no longer the case, they can just go back to Firefox and modify that version to their heart's content.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#15

Post by sweep4r »

>Yup. you can all calm down and take some time to educate yourself about the damage this can and will cause to small-website owners

You can all calm down and take some time to hear me tell you you have to believe in what I believe.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#17

Post by anonymousab »

na85 wrote: post #7

That AdNauseam causes potential damage to people running ads and generating revenue from ads by devaluing clicks is a feature, not a bug. My understanding of the plugin is that it views advertising as universally bad, and that if a site cannot survive without ads, it must not be worth much at all, and deserves to die. I wholeheartedly agree with this view.

I've heard that the default settings for the extension were not as aggressive in what they 'click' but have not had a chance to check out out.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#19

Post by hbbio »

The motto of Pale Moon is "Your browser, Your way". But apparently not very so...

The current ad system is broken and, although I understand Google decision to protect its own profits, I don't see why an open source project that aims to provide an unbiased browsing experience would follow suit.

Re: Pale Moon blocks AdNauseam extension

#20

Post by anonymousab »

0xndc wrote: post #10
rocky1138 wrote: post #2

Can't people just compile their own version sans-censorship?

You can remove the "censorship" with a 30-second config change. I don't understand why the people on that forum are so up in arms about something this trivial.

For a similar reason people get mad about telemetry and other features being opt-out rather than opt-in.

I think the more overarching point is that many people went to palemoon in response to actions they viewed as harmful for the web or for browsers, from mozilla and Google. For many people this establishes that it is not the ideologically pure browser they (mistakenly or not) thought they were getting.

Post reply on HN