Correct title should read 'native ad-filtering'.
(remark directed towards techcrunch - blocking would e.g. be uBlock Origin)
Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
41–50 of 186 posts
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are all probably too rich to understand the concept of paying for mobile data.
It depends on where you are, I guess. I pay for data on my cell in France but the amount of data I am allowed each month before things start to slow down (100GB, up from 50GB a few months ago) means I never get close to getting throttled by auto-playing videos.
How much do you pay for that plan?
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are all probably too rich to understand the concept of paying for mobile data.
It depends on where you are, I guess. I pay for data on my cell in France but the amount of data I am allowed each month before things start to slow down (100GB, up from 50GB a few months ago) means I never get close to getting throttled by auto-playing videos.
> 100 GB
Just across the border, in Germany, a usual data plan includes only 1-4 GB before slowdown to 2G.
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#44This should be great on mobile. On mobile there are no extensions and there are at least two news sites I frequent that abuse it by showing a full page popup before every article.
That's the reason why I don't use Chrome on mobile (Android). There are plenty of valid alternatives, Brave is one of them.
Brave is great. If you go into settings and disable javascript by default, you can easily use the Brave button to whitelist javascript on a site-by-site basis.
I cannot browse the web anymore with javascript enabled by default, it's such a terrible experience. I don't know how others can tolerate the state of things.
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends on where you are, I guess. I pay for data on my cell in France but the amount of data I am allowed each month before things start to slow down (100GB, up from 50GB a few months ago) means I never get close to getting throttled by auto-playing videos.
How much do you pay for that plan?
It's usually around 20€/month for that kind of plan in France (with unlimited calls and SMS).
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#46"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.
"Tracking" is not negative enough. Let's go with "spy blocker".
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends on where you are, I guess. I pay for data on my cell in France but the amount of data I am allowed each month before things start to slow down (100GB, up from 50GB a few months ago) means I never get close to getting throttled by auto-playing videos.
How much do you pay for that plan?
20 euros per month with "Free" (that's the name of the company) ISP.
"Free" has his share of problems, notably many people complain that the quality of their connection is strenuous at best, some people don't. It's a bit of gamble with them.
What can't be denied is that in France there was a before-Free and an after-Free. They introduced 20gb for 20E/month when everybody else was at 5gb for 50E/month (not the exact amounts, but it was that ballpark). The result is that the other ISP had to align themselves with Free, and now you have a lot of other similar offers to choose from. Yay Free.
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#48It seems the criteria for blocking is rather discretionary. Are they going to block a site which has annoying Google ads? Frankly this seems to be another excuse to build a walled garden to try and serve their interests.
> Frankly this seems to be another excuse to build a walled garden ??? How do you make the leap there? Adblocking = walled garden? Are you just picking a random buzzword? Edit: Do the people replying to me understand the meaning of a "walled garden"?
From wikipedia:
> A closed platform, walled garden or closed ecosystem[1][2] is a software system where the carrier or service provider has control over applications, content, and media, and restricts convenient access to non-approved applications or content.
Surely you can see how google having control over which ads get through and which don't fits this definition.
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#49How 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?!
According to the article, the ads deemed "overly annoying or intrusive" are defined by "the standards established by the Coalition for Better Ads, of which it is a member". Since it's not Google actually deciding this, how is that anti-competitive?
BTW, the Coalition for Better Ads has many members [0], including Facebook and other big ads providers.
I'm personally not convinced this will solve the issue, but I believe it's a least a step in the right direction.
Re: Google will turn on native ad-blocking in Chrome on February 15
#50This should be great on mobile. On mobile there are no extensions and there are at least two news sites I frequent that abuse it by showing a full page popup before every article.
> On mobile there are no extensions
uBlock Origin is available on Firefox for Android, and works like a charm.