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

How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

ctrl.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 326 posts

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#231

Post by regexnerd »

kevmo wrote: post #164

Just use Brave, everyone. I think everyone here knows there's no way Google's sandbox doesn't morph into quicksand. https://brave.com

Brave is ad friendly, something that doesn't sit well with me. I want it all blocked. No ads, beacons, trackers, bad JavaScript. It's my browser, I call the shots as to what is allowed through. Ad companies have proven themselves to be evil and untrustworthy. They are now one of the main vectors of malware. I owe it to myself and my family to block everything like ads, beacons, and tracking my our network. I'm not interested in helping other people make money, generate crypto currency, whatever... My computers, my rules. Ads are a bad way to make money anyway and I've been blocking them since 1998. No way would I use Brave or any other software that actually encourages the advert companies to continue down their dark path.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#232

Post by mingfli »

mquander wrote: post #224
chacham15 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very pessimistic view of the world. Not all ads are attempts to hijack your brain. For example, if you were already thinking about buying a specific keyboard and then saw an ad for that same keyboard with a 10% discount, that ad would have actually provided positive value to you. You save money for the thing that you already want. Not all ads are like that, but the example goes to show that there is a spect…

Assuming the premises of your scenario (that the ad didn't change anything about you to make you more likely to buy the keyboard, or adversely influence you in any other way), the display of this ad is a disaster for the advertiser. Advertisers will work as hard as they can to make that not happen.

Not true. If I know you want a keyboard and that you can buy it from 100 different stores, I would probably give you a discount to buy it from me as long as it still makes me money.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#233

Post by drdeca »

mquander wrote: post #224
chacham15 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very pessimistic view of the world. Not all ads are attempts to hijack your brain. For example, if you were already thinking about buying a specific keyboard and then saw an ad for that same keyboard with a 10% discount, that ad would have actually provided positive value to you. You save money for the thing that you already want. Not all ads are like that, but the example goes to show that there is a spect…

Assuming the premises of your scenario (that the ad didn't change anything about you to make you more likely to buy the keyboard, or adversely influence you in any other way), the display of this ad is a disaster for the advertiser. Advertisers will work as hard as they can to make that not happen.

This is true. However, I do think that there are a few (possibly rare) cases where advertisements can cause a mutual benefit.

If I intend to purchase a product of a certain category, and would like to choose one with a particular property, but am under the assumption that no such product exists, and I see an ad for such a product, correcting my impression, I may, as a result, purchase that product instead of competitors which don't have the property that I desire, which satisfies both my own wants, and the wants of the company advertising the product.

This has happened to me at least once.

However, most ads that I see do not provide me with any new information, and the strategy of having ads follow users around after the first time they see it seems somewhat contrary to this type of benefit, and I don't totally understand why it is understood to be effective.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#234

Post by regexnerd »

534b44a wrote: post #72

I long for the day Google asks you to disable your adblocker (uBlock, ABP, etc.) to be able to search.

You are part of the problem. People should not have to give up their privacy and expose their devices to the evil of the advert companies just to get online. Ads are almost the number one vector for malware. Ad servers are rarely, if ever, equipped with decent security and are frequently compromised.

Ads are a poor method for making money and the system is horribly gamed at every opportunity. Anything worth having is worth paying for. Google and their ilk have ruined the Internet and the general online landscape by dint of offering "free" services that are not really free; people pay for them dearly with lack of privacy and security and the return of a "free" service is not worth what is given.

I have happily paid for Fastmail since 2002. They are security conscience, responsive, and give a damn about their customers. I will use no one else. They are very transparent with their issues and enjoy providing their use base with information regarding their running of the company. Good luck with Google or Microsoft giving even paying customers this level of service and transparency.

Google have become too powerful. Way too powerful. They have their awful ads, beacons, and trackers on most websites and people just blissfully go along with it. I use zero Google services and block all of their tracking with a Pi-hole and other software tools. Ditto allowing no Android devices on my network. Getting into bed with Google in any way, shape, or form is literally giving away your privacy for a few trinkets that are worth nothing. If it's worth having, it's worth paying for. It's all an electronic leash...

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#235

Post by akvadrako »

lamby wrote: post #228
JoshMnem wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People mostly install adblockers to block really annoying ads.* Many people use ad blockers because they want to block all ads. There are many reasons to block them, including malware, privacy, and brainwashing. If ads works to manipulate behavior (and they do, otherwise people wouldn't buy them), and you don't want to be manipulated, you shouldn't let professionals attempt to hijack your brain (whether those attem…

I can't be sure, but I think a non-trivial reason why I block them is because they are frankly unspeakably ugly. :)

This is very true. If ads were less repetitive and original, I would even choose to view them.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#236

Post by akvadrako »

eli wrote: post #136
drngdds wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like there's a simpler explanation that's still not 'good intentions': 1. Lots of people are using adblockers to block all ads, including Google's, and they don't like that. 2. People mostly install adblockers to block really annoying ads.* 3. By building in an adblocker that blocks annoying ads, people will stop installing full adblockers that also block Google's ads. *There are real issues with non-annoying…

If people no longer feel the need to install a stronger ad blocker why is that bad?

Because those people are still being manipulated into making less than optimal choices. Ads are just there to make society worse.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#237

Post by akvadrako »

wyager wrote: post #43
carlosrg wrote: post #15

This is a good thing. Advertising is one of the most effective ways companies have to let people know about their products - I'd say they're essential in free market economies. But having ads is one thing and completely disrupting the user experience is another. Finding a balance is a better approach than blocking all ads.

Ads are almost never how informed purchasers make decisions. In the age of the Internet, review systems (whether collaborative or curated) are infinitely better sources of product information than ads. They are also vulnerable to manipulation from would-be advertisers, but less so (and any influence can be mitigated by trusted reviewers).

Ads do tell you something about a company though. Like, do they waste a lot of money on marketing? Have a good sense of humour? Target my in-group as a customer? Pay attention to detail?

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#239

Post by wmf »

hyperdimension wrote: post #134
Andrex wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your opinion, would spinning off Chrome into its own company under Alphabet be a possible solution?

Not OP, but that seems strange to me. Chrome is a product, not really a business. I can't see any way for them to make money, besides maybe enterprise deployments.

If Firefox makes $500M per year from search referrals, Chrome could make over $1B. Chrome would be very profitable as an independent company.

Re: How Google Chrome’s ad blocker works

#240

Post by ksrm »

drngdds wrote: post #103
mabbo wrote: post #89

I think there's good intentions by Google here. That said, let's talk about the worst-case scenario, the thing that Google could actually do that is entirely anti-competitive. Step 1: Google finds a large number of competitors who are doing pretty well playing by their rules. Google finds some trait they all have in common. Google then modifies their own ads to not have that trait. Step 2: Google declares the given t…

I feel like there's a simpler explanation that's still not 'good intentions': 1. Lots of people are using adblockers to block all ads, including Google's, and they don't like that. 2. People mostly install adblockers to block really annoying ads.* 3. By building in an adblocker that blocks annoying ads, people will stop installing full adblockers that also block Google's ads. *There are real issues with non-annoying…

Unless they block YouTube ads, I think a lot of people are still going to use an ad blocker.
Post reply on HN