Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15 • Hacker News Board

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#31

Post by rypskar » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:21 PM UTC

jasonkostempski wrote: post #13

gumby wrote: post #3

"Intrusive"? I assume they mean visually or auditory. Presumably intrusive tracking, web bugs and the like will be fair game.

Yeah, it's time to start calling proper ad-blockers, "tracking blockers". It sounds more like something you need, like anti-virus, and also sounds like something that's "fair" to use if you have moral concerns about ad blocking.

I use ghostery to block tracking, no ad-blocker. But since almost all ads track users almost all ads are blocked. If anyone want to show me ads they will have to show ads without tracking that try to find which ads will be least interesting for me

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#32

Post by yummy » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:26 PM UTC

fortythirteen wrote: post #30

ourmandave wrote: post #6

Long as I can keep using uBlock Origin and disable theirs it's fine with me.

Still doesn't make it ok, from an anti-competitive standpoint. "As long as I can download Netscape, having IE pre-installed is fine with me."

It's better than having no browser at all...

But what's the competition? Is uBlock gonna sue Google? No. Or adblock with a single developer? (Don't know if it's still true)... Well, no.

Let's see how it's done. Most consumers will probably benefit from it.

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#33

Post by 9point6 » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:31 PM UTC

Artlav wrote: post #21

I bet it won't block all the damn "download our shitty app instead of using the fully functional website we have" full screen popups...

Isn't there a Google PageRank penalty for sites that do that now?

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#34

Post by _rpd » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:34 PM UTC

fatwa wrote: post #19

How will this work? Algorithm-based? Blacklist? Smells like useless cat and mouse to me

Ad blocking will always be an arms race. But even small imposed expenses on advertisers seems to eliminate most ads.

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#35

Post by fredley » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:34 PM UTC

fortythirteen wrote: post #27

How is this not anti-competitive behavior? If Microsoft was heavily fined for installing their own browser in their operating system, how is an advertising company like Google using their browser, which has the largest market share, to block competing ads not the same thing?!

It probably is, but (as with MS and IE), by the time the courts finally give a verdict on the matter it will be too late for everyone else.

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#36

Post by nofilter » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:34 PM UTC

wst_ wrote: post #23

I still find it amusing that they consider auto-play video OK as long as it's muted. Sound is the problem, but so is auto-playing itself.

Safari doesn't auto-play videos. Safari is also very resource usage friendly.

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#37

Post by circa » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:41 PM UTC

Will they make them go away with this one weird trick?

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#38

Post by 0xFFC » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:42 PM UTC

fortythirteen wrote: post #27

How is this not anti-competitive behavior? If Microsoft was heavily fined for installing their own browser in their operating system, how is an advertising company like Google using their browser, which has the largest market share, to block competing ads not the same thing?!

In HN community:

Because people in HN do have double standards when it comes to Microsoft vs Google.

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#39

Post by rootlocus » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:43 PM UTC

yummy wrote: post #32

fortythirteen wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still doesn't make it ok, from an anti-competitive standpoint. "As long as I can download Netscape, having IE pre-installed is fine with me."

It's better than having no browser at all... But what's the competition? Is uBlock gonna sue Google? No. Or adblock with a single developer? (Don't know if it's still true)... Well, no. Let's see how it's done. Most consumers will probably benefit from it.

The competition isn't other ad blockers. It's other advertisers, which google could choose to block.

Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15

#40

Post by saas_co_de » Wed, Dec 20, 2017, 1:44 PM UTC

fortythirteen wrote: post #27

How is this not anti-competitive behavior? If Microsoft was heavily fined for installing their own browser in their operating system, how is an advertising company like Google using their browser, which has the largest market share, to block competing ads not the same thing?!

Exactly. I don't see how this can possibly not be considered illegal anti-competitive behavior.

Their goals are not really anti-competitive. The point of this feature is to stop the bleed from ad blocking extensions and alternative browsers which are the real threat to their business.

But there is no way for them to do this that doesn't end up looking really bad.

Probably they know it will get shut down eventually, but it will take years to happen, so worth it.