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

Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 377 posts

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#361

Post by lousken »

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #137
lousken wrote: post #16

Disabling javascript is the best anti-anti-adblock solution. I wish chrome added an option for tampermonkey scripts to be run with disabled js, that would make this solution perfect.

I've found Policy Control [0] to generally be a better choice than completely disabling JavaScript. Way fewer sites break with my defaults: disabling third-party resources and requests prevent most ads and trackers.

I fiddled with disabling 3rd party scripts a lot, but the problem are inline scripts on some pages. They detect adblock that way and serve a cookie which if detected by the server translates all 3rd party links to first party like a proxy which makes this technique useless - check e.g. idnes.cz - go to this site with an adblocker, reload the page multiple times and check cookies for adb and adb.key. I mean sure, you can disable cookies for the domain but it would be easier if I could just run my own script and disable everything else.

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#362

Post by Pokepokalypse »

stewbrew wrote: post #148
nojvek wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google + FB, the worlds largest online advertising companies lose probably billions to ad blockers. I’m sure quite a number of people got nice bonuses and promos for bringing some of that revenue back.

They don't lose billions because some people hide annoying stuff that makes their pages esesstially unusable and have no extra benefit because ... I personally don't think this kind of online marketing actually works. I cannot imagine someone actually buying something because of some meaningless text snippet, a stupid blinking image or a video clip.

So very sorry (and depressed) to say, but there are some sound and scientifically based metrics that show that it does work. I know. You and I can't imagine it. Personally; I think that it can't possibly be bringing in as much money as they spend. But whatever.

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#363

Post by lousken »

uwu wrote: post #184
lousken wrote: post #16

Disabling javascript is the best anti-anti-adblock solution. I wish chrome added an option for tampermonkey scripts to be run with disabled js, that would make this solution perfect.

> I wish chrome added an option for tampermonkey scripts to be run with disabled js, that would make this solution perfect. that's up to tampermonkey but maybe it's possible that google wouldn't like it since it would let userscripts access extension apis what tampermonkey does is inserting the script into the page in a script tag to isolate it from the extension[1] and let it access variables defined by scripts on t…

I know, author of tampermonkey is waiting for this https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=471801 to be implemented. As for the extension that's up to you :) you can just post it on github and not to the store.

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#364

Post by ggg9990 »

mobilemidget wrote: post #200
joaodlf wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't know why you call it negative, I call it realistic. It's like putting all _caught_ pedofiles in a jail, and then saying children can roam the streets free and in safety...

You're arguing against yourself. They do put all caught pedophiles in jail, and it's extremely safe for children to roam the streets from a pedophile point of view (but very risky from a car accident point of view).

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#365

Post by apricot »

QAPereo wrote: post #325
_0ffh wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not for non-web-devs, I feel I don't know. I'm not a web dev (x), and I went from "dafuq?" to "I get it, this is so cool" in two minutes flat. Let's just say it sure helps if you're a technical person, not j. random user. (x) but engineer/CS, tbh edit: remove accidental markup

Same here, and I’m not an engineer or CS. uMatrix is IMO something a bright child could work out through trial and error.

Am bright child, can confirm.

(Just kidding, I'm actually a foolish middle-aged man. But I'm talking about my inner bright child.)

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#366

Post by Pokepokalypse »

quantum_magpie wrote: post #112
danso wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “oh, how can we change our ads so people will accept them?” If a single website -- say, your local or regional news site -- overhauled its ad experience to become more user-friendly, how would you even notice, if their ad server was added to your ad blocker's blacklist?

If their ads were a static .jpeg hosted locally, without any javascript, ad blockers would not block them.

we (users) would catalog them by md5 hash and block them accordingly. It will always be an arms race: but at the end of the day; it's the users' computer, it's the users' connection.

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#367

Post by Pokepokalypse »

executesorder66 wrote: post #309
IronKettle wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So as soon as they shut down, someone else will make an alternative. They exist already. They're mostly horrible. I pretty religiously use DDG, but even then I probably use the !g operator every third search or so. Reddit's already almost entirely open-source IIRC. People have used it to make alternatives. Check out Voat, you can see the alternative in action (you might not like what you find, though).

They're horrible becuase not a lot of effort goes into them. If there's no alternative, then they will drastically improve. Voat is bad becuase of the users. Not becuase it is an alternative to Reddit. If all Reddit users switched to coat, it would have a pretty similar culture and content, becuase it will have the same users. I also use ddg but I haven't used a !g in over a year.

The big problem with Reddit was that the moderators abused their power to censor. (and in some cases, moderation was infiltrated with bad-actors, trying to create a controversy to manipulate a group of Reddit users to get them to leave).

The problem with Reddit alternatives like Voat; was that there were no responsible moderators who would censor the absolutely indefensible.

In other words: Welcome to the same problem the Internet has known since use-net. Hell. Since the BBS days.

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#368

Post by BoorishBears »

trophycase wrote: post #328
BoorishBears wrote: post #166

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…

People won't pay 99 cents for an app because it's nearly impossible to evaluate it's quality from the beginning.

The problem doesn’t go away for other types of content and that reasoning is often repeated but not supported by other markets.

There are apps that had thousands of downloads and great reviews that failed because of peoples in unwillingness to pay for them.

How will you know you’re going to like a news story before you pay to read it?

The metrics you have are the same as any other type of content, word of mouth, reviews, past performance of the content creator.

People will spend 10$ on a movie ticket when critics and reviewers are split on if it’s a good movie. They’ll spend 20$ to try a new dish they might not like on the recommendation of a single person, even an impartial waiter. But they don’t value apps so they don’t pay for them. People will go to app developers with their brilliant idea and act shocked when they get a 5 figure estimate because they figure app development is a dime a dozen.

Likewise I doubt many people appreciate the true cost of the content they consume.

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#369

Post by pacifika »

Karunamon wrote: post #271
aleksei wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual analogy is walking into a store and being forced to buy something for walking in. I don't feel the store owner should be entitled to do that. As for moral justifiability, I find it unacceptable that a website operator can sell data about me without my consent just for following a link to their site.

Data about you is not necessarily owned by you.

It is in Europe

Re: Many major websites are taking silent anti-ad-blocking measures

#370

Post by dreen »

FlyingLawnmower wrote: post #355
programbreeding wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried countless browsers on Android, as well as various adblocking plugins and services. I always found myself going back to Chrome because it just worked. I started using Brave about a year ago and I love it. The only thing I'm missing is syncing my bookmarks between Brave on my phone and Chrome on my computer, but a year later and it hasn't bothered me enough to find a fix.

Why not try Brave for desktop? Note: I am not a Brave user, genuinely curious about your experience!

I tried Brave on desktop but UI is a bit rough for me and lacking configurability. But it does improve every time I check
Post reply on HN