191–200 of 377 posts
It's not the ads themselves that make me run to the blockers. It's their creepiness and tracking. If they're just images shown same to everybody, then I'm okay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>to profile you and optimally manipulate your behavior to sell you shit. ...by showing you ads.
Not limited to showing ads
I use an ad blocker, because otherwise the web is unusable. Maybe if (1) fewer ads pumped up CPU and memory usage for a page, and (2) companies didn't give their non-technical asshole free reign over placing scripts on the page, then maybe many of these sites wouldn't be so bad to visit without an ad blocker.
Animated ads actually give me sensory overload. If a site could promise non-moving ads, I'd gladly whitelist them. It's amazing how many sites think you'll just accept incredibly intrusive and annoying banners.
Now I just siphon the images into a rss feed. If they want my eyeball they better start putting up banners like they used to. Active content can fuck right off.
In the paper, this excerpt: > We choose Adblock as it is one of the most popular. It is also possible to use Adblock Plus or uBlock, as the way they operate is exactly the same — HTTP filters and HTML element hiding. AdBlock in the Chrome store uses Adblock Plus filtering engine[1], so to say the way these two "operate is exactly the same" makes sense. However uBlock Origin uses its own code base, and is far better e…
TIL that the author of uBlock Origin reads HN. Cool! And thank you for your service to the Internet!
Block any outgoing connection you don't trust instead of simply taking some 3rd party list with URLs, unverified, no quality control etc, and only blacklist these KNOWN bad urls.
Ad parties don't sit still, they don't keep their ads on the same url when they found out they are blocked or maybe already preventive rotate through new urls etc.
In the end you'll end up with some bizar long list which has to be checked for every url you visit etc etc. This will be a performance hog, and if you cant imagine that, then your list isn't long enough yet.
Use proper egress filtering, allow what you know, and don't allow what you don't know, not just what some 3rd party put on a list.
My advice for you in 2018.
For ""Block by default" is a usability nightmare."
yes it is for a week or 2, but I prefer usability nightmare then a safety nightmare.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>what incentives would change the system so that I can pay, other than using an ad blocker? That's really simple, more people need to be willing to pay. I mean, I say in other parts of the page that I can't pay what the content is worth, but I'm actually not sure that's true for myself. But it is true for the general public. And it's not they can't because they can't afford it, but rather, they don't want to. So we c…
The problem is I don't read 50 articles on 1 news site. I read 1 article each on 50 different news sites, linked by aggregators like HN. Am i expected to pay to 50 different sites? That quickly becomes unmanageable. Maybe something like radio stations have is required for the internet. Where the artists get paid based on how often a radio station plays their song.
You’re expected to find some number of sites X that let you pay to access ad-free content that total to an amount you find palatable and limit yourself to those.
It’s not trivial, and it’s inconvenient. The sites like that are relatively few and far between.
But it means you’re making a sacrifice to support sites that are trying to break out of the model that you don’t support.
If enough people do that, the incentive forms to make paying for content upfront and ad-free and suddenly the market will solve the problem of 50 sites wanting payment, be it through easier payment mechanisms or “share cropping”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>what incentives would change the system so that I can pay, other than using an ad blocker? That's really simple, more people need to be willing to pay. I mean, I say in other parts of the page that I can't pay what the content is worth, but I'm actually not sure that's true for myself. But it is true for the general public. And it's not they can't because they can't afford it, but rather, they don't want to. So we c…
I think it's not about monetary cost, but about attention. If you had an opt-out payment model where users are automatically charged a capped amount that they can later refund, or even a paywall with a "Pay with Ads-B-Gone" button, users would accept much more readily. Or maybe an emotional approach like the Guardian or Patreon would work better. The point here, though, is that you can both like the content and want…
But if the creator only offers ads as a method of payment and you consume their content while blocking their ads, regardless of what you want to do, you aren’t paying them for their content.
At that point your options are to continue consuming the content (and preferably not post comments vilifying the content creator driven to using ads like the original comment I responded to above does, which I take exception to) or to not consume the content, signaling to the content creator that something isn’t working about their ad-based model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TIL that the author of uBlock Origin reads HN. Cool! And thank you for your service to the Internet!
They all suck. Period. Block any outgoing connection you don't trust instead of simply taking some 3rd party list with URLs, unverified, no quality control etc, and only blacklist these KNOWN bad urls. Ad parties don't sit still, they don't keep their ads on the same url when they found out they are blocked or maybe already preventive rotate through new urls etc. In the end you'll end up with some bizar long list whi…
I have been using uBlock Origin for years and it's one of those things that just works. Turning it off in those rare moments it needs to be off is a bleak reminder of the state of the internet. Why would I want to go through the hassle of managing all of this work by myself?
A massive THANK YOU to the individuals behind uBlock - You literally make the internet tolerable for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My bet is microsubscription, but that's only because it's something I've been working on (Robojar). Part of my motivation has been to make the best parts of the early web economically viable. For a few years it was normal to have relatively successful small sites with good writing and regular readers. They've largely been driven out by the economics of clickbait. I'd like to help that come back by breaking the rigid…
Flattr http://flattr.com is the best solution out there IMHO, Patreon is good but only makes sense if you're a regular/loyal consumer of a source.
the irony on full display (at the linked article) in chrome devtools / record perf timeline and network log. incognito: 4.4mb, 7000ms scripting, 365 requests, onload: 7600ms with uMatrix (no third party shit): 612kb, 190ms of scripting, 56 requests, onload: 500ms this is on a 300MBit connection
https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/27/thousands-of-major-sites-a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They all suck. Period. Block any outgoing connection you don't trust instead of simply taking some 3rd party list with URLs, unverified, no quality control etc, and only blacklist these KNOWN bad urls. Ad parties don't sit still, they don't keep their ads on the same url when they found out they are blocked or maybe already preventive rotate through new urls etc. In the end you'll end up with some bizar long list whi…
Way too negative. I have been using uBlock Origin for years and it's one of those things that just works. Turning it off in those rare moments it needs to be off is a bleak reminder of the state of the internet. Why would I want to go through the hassle of managing all of this work by myself? A massive THANK YOU to the individuals behind uBlock - You literally make the internet tolerable for me.
It's like putting all _caught_ pedofiles in a jail, and then saying children can roam the streets free and in safety...