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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 186 posts

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

#171

Post by mrguyorama »

saas_co_de wrote: post #113
fortythirteen wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their goals are not really anti-competitive One could make the argument that by putting a web browser in Windows, Microsoft was only providing a common service to their default OS. The problem here is that Google makes almost all its revenue from the very medium that they are now actively blocking from other providers.

The point I am making is that they are not doing this to freeze out competitors. They have already won. They don't have any meaningful competition to worry about. The threat is ad blocking and alternative browsers. That doesn't change the anticompetitive nature of their behavior but it does explain the motivation.

Then I'm really glad sane anti-compete and trust-busting laws wouldn't care about the motivation.

This is using large scale marketshare in one market to effect a tangible and monetary benefit in another market.

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

#172

Post by [deleted] »

saas_co_de wrote: post #40
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, b…

[deleted]

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

#173

Post by Havoc »

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...

Just when we got everything somewhat standardized to use the same application (browser) for all content this stupid separate app for every content producer culture explodes. Seems like three steps back

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

#174

Post by baud147258 »

kbwt wrote: post #99
baud147258 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lucky you. I'm in France and I got 50 Mo before starting to pay for my data. Granted, I'm using the old 5€ offering from Orange (called Sosh), because I'm not using a lot of data (no video, very few pictures, some text) and I'm too lazy to change. Also I'm not sure my phone can support another mobile network.

You need a phone that supports LTE for the Free contract, otherwise you only get 3 GB of data.

Oh I'm pretty sure my phone support LTE, but I'm saying that the phone might be locked to a provider (Orange) and will reject any SIM not from it. Since the phone is originally from a company which has an exclusive contract with Orange for all mobile hardware and subscriptions, it is not surprising.

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

#175

Post by user5994461 »

epicide wrote: post #158
user5994461 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that AdBlock getting paid is messed up. I can't say that it entirely ruined the purpose though. My parents don't need fine controls. They just need something to block most of the malware, adware and popups. That's the world we live in.

I understand your point that they don't need fine grain controls, but does uBlock Origin require anything beyond the defaults? I'm just not seeing the benefit from using AdBlock Plus, anymore.

Depends what you mean by require. There are some important blacklists on both ublock and adblock that are off by default, they can be enabled.

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

#176

Post by raguuu »

jicks wrote: post #10
evolighting wrote: post #4

So, Your only ad choice will be Goolge! Since another ad provider (?) may be "annoying or intrusive"; Yes I`m just kidding, But google is far too POWERFUL anyway.

No, they'll only block ads that don't follow the guidelines defined by the Coalition for Better Ads [0] (Google is a member, but there is a lot of other members, like Facebook, ...). Note that this may include ads provided by Google. [0] : https://www.betterads.org/

Why are there so many people shilling for Google with this "coalition"?

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

#177

Post by hutzlibu »

betterunix2 wrote: post #150
hutzlibu wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As long as I can download Netscape, having IE pre-installed is fine with me." Sure it is. If I buy a operation system and it comes bundled with a browser ... why should that be a problem? (the problem I see somewhere else...that you have sometimes no choice except to use that OS because of market dominance)

Windows became the dominant OS because of demand from computer users; the problem was that Microsoft used its dominance in the OS market as leverage to gain dominance in the browser market. It is not just that the OS came with a bundled browser -- Microsoft deliberately and for no technical reason made IE a dependency of several unrelated Windows features (e.g. the desktop, the file browser, etc.). Most people receiv…

Which was ridiculously as well, just like the cookie thing.

"- Microsoft deliberately and for no technical reason made IE a dependency of several unrelated Windows features"

So?

But they did not forbid other browsers to run. People who wanted, could choose all the time.

And even if they would have forbidden it, I still think regulation is stupid, because it still keeps the status quo of Microsoft OS Desktop dominance. (Luckily it doesn't matter much anymore) because when you regulate the worst things away, the base is still bad, but people have less incentive to change the platform for the better ...

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

#178

Post by colanderman »

user5994461 wrote: post #153
colanderman wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> set by the tv channel and the broader regulation. Which is key. Television ad regulations aren't set – and enforced – by the dominant advertisement broker.

The channel can refuse to play any ad for any reason. They standards are partially set by the channel.

...who is not the broker.

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

#179

Post by musage »

mattjsmith wrote: post #124
0xFFC wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Microsoft wanted you to buy their software. Google gives it away for free. That's the only thing I've come up with that explains the enduring romance.

It's not "free", they give it away to sell ads. With Microsoft, before the constant update stuff, you could at least say you buy version X of product Y and then you have that, like some tool in a tool shed. Now that's a shifting mess of attached strings, too, but Google was never anything but that.

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

#180

Post by user5994461 »

colanderman wrote: post #178
user5994461 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The channel can refuse to play any ad for any reason. They standards are partially set by the channel.

...who is not the broker.

Let's get back in times when there was TV but there was no regulation yet. A channel surely had to be the broker and set the standards.

Internet is young. There will be some regulations and standards, eventually.

Post reply on HN