31–40 of 112 posts
The headline makes it sound like they automatically start it if you're using an adblocker. That is not the case. Check the screenshot in the article.
So...doesn't this mean their website will start getting flagged as malware? Many security companies flag CoinHive as malware...
The version requiring explicit consent is being used on the Salon website, and isn't currently being blocked by AdBlockers/malware detectors.
I'm really disappointed about how online publishers handle the decline of ad revenue. Of course my ad-blocker will also block your miner script, what do you think how this works? And better yet, integrating external third-party JavaScript into your website screams for abuse by attackers. Someone could just change the wallet address the scripts mine for and suddenly all your visitors not only do not mine for Salon, but mine for someone else entirely.
But yeah, ask me about "well how do we make money?" and I don't really have an answer myself. IMO sources like Patreon are the most appealing for me, though it might hurt websites I have not yet in my list and would not be able to access if I'm not a subscriber.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yikes, you'd think a media company would be smarter than to use a software that returns hundreds of articles about malware as the top results of a google search for its name.
Salon is well known for some poor quality journalism/blogging. Not surprised to see that is reflected in their management/technology descions.
Thinking about this, how long till ad blockers will also block these crypto mining scripts... it's not that different.
I imagine the mining code can be transformed so that it will be hard to detect.
Isn't that a good thing? Imagine you have a little widget in your browser that displays something like '50%' which means you constantly use 50% of one core to mine a cryptocurrency for the page you are currently looking at. And in return you get an ad free web. I think that would be way better then the web as we know it.
Better to evolve a micropayments model that works (because at least i can quantify what I pay)
If this is done without explicit permission from the user, I can see it being some sort of hacking offence. So yes, I run adblockers. I will also run coinblockers. You're not going to be mining on my laptop processor and battery. Not yours. If you don't want me reading your stuff for free (which is perfectly reasonable!) then block me, instruct your server not to send content on those terms. I'm happy with that. But…
Out of curiosity... Rather than blocking ads, why not block sites that have ads? This way you comply with their implicit wish not to have you read their content without some sort of monetary return.
If you do not want your stuff on the open web, stop putting it on the open web.. It's really simple
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity... Rather than blocking ads, why not block sites that have ads? This way you comply with their implicit wish not to have you read their content without some sort of monetary return.
Honestly, it's a bit of a gray ethical area for me. On one hand, what you say makes perfect sense. On the other hand, I like having my cake and eating it, too. It's like having a buffet dinner where the host tells you: "sure, you can eat this juicy steak, but you also have to eat the surrounding shards of glass that I've put there to feed my thirst for human dignity". If I particularly like the host I might do it, ot…
I've also worked at multiple publishing companies and I can tell you that although their owned and operated websites were run with ad money, none of the people involved had a thirst for human dignity. It is more like, we all wanted to make a living and enough people simultaneously wanted to read the content AND didn't mind the ads enough to click away. Any time I've seen subscription or pay per content tried at publishers I've been with it fails dramatically because the percentage of willing readers is just too small unless you are a very niche and valuable or very large and famous publisher.
If this is done without explicit permission from the user, I can see it being some sort of hacking offence. So yes, I run adblockers. I will also run coinblockers. You're not going to be mining on my laptop processor and battery. Not yours. If you don't want me reading your stuff for free (which is perfectly reasonable!) then block me, instruct your server not to send content on those terms. I'm happy with that. But…
When ads are enabled, your browser is sometimes executing javascript to conduct part of some ad-auction thing to figure out which is the best ad to show you (i don't work in ad-tech, so this is probably 60% incorrect, but you get the idea).
I don't fundamentally see the difference between a website running unsolicited mining crapware in your browser versus unsolicited adtech crapware. So I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you -- if running mining crapware is regarded as "hacking", then we may as well regard all client side code execution related to adtech as "hacking" too.
Isn't that a good thing? Imagine you have a little widget in your browser that displays something like '50%' which means you constantly use 50% of one core to mine a cryptocurrency for the page you are currently looking at. And in return you get an ad free web. I think that would be way better then the web as we know it.