Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland • Hacker News Board

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#101

Post by boomboomsubban » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 3:34 PM UTC

Cyclone_ wrote: post #94

VMG wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish the internet would be client-side filtered by default, instead of centrally moderated. We'll end up with filter bubbles either way.

Adblock plus is a client side plugin, the issue was that the blacklist was maintained by someone who wanted to block more than ads. Perhaps there needs to be reviewers from multiple sources for when changes are made to these sort of lists.

Requiring a review before release requires a rather large change to how the current system works, adding more centralization, and slows down how quickly new threats can be blocked. This event took two days to notice and be changed, and that's for a list with a relatively low amount of users. The current method seems fine.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#102

Post by akvadrako » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 3:37 PM UTC

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #38

TorKlingberg wrote: post #26

The fundamental problem is that these filter lists are maintained by random volunteers, who everyone just assumes are trustworthy. The browser makers avoid the issues by having ad-blockers be third-party extensions. The extension makers don't make the filter lists either, they just import from EasyList and similar. It's surprising there arent't more cases of corruption and broken trust. I wish I could get ad-blocking…

I'm not familiar with it but aren't Apple doing things with built-in adblocking these days? As an aside (but still relating to your comment) I tend to trust my adblocker based on the "many eyeballs" theory and I think the OP and ensuing discussion here is proof that the system mostly works.

They provide ad-blocking APIs but don't have any built-in filters.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#103

Post by sucrose » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 3:42 PM UTC

ezoe wrote: post #100

I am becoming to doubt the value of adblock and the mindset of filter maintainers these days. It cause a lot of issues on their side but the customer blame the server. I've heard a story that web-based game not working for some people for no apparent reason. The developer used their psychic power and change the file name of image files which was something like "foo_ads_bar.png"(the user supplied error log indicated t…

Similar situation: The company I work for uses the word "ads" in their website's asset filenames, for all images. When uBo is enabled, their website is basically text-only. They were oblivious until my first day when I mentioned I reviewed their website from home.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#104

Post by boomboomsubban » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 3:51 PM UTC

patd wrote: post #79

fjsolwmv wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's technologically cool, but isn't "switch from adblock to uMatrix" a more direct and comprehensive solution?

The target audience is website owners. If my users are all using list based blockers (adblock, uBlock, mobiles, proxies, ...) and those lists block my content, I'd like to know quickly so I can appeal to the list maintainers.

Even in the rare instance you convince a list maintainer, forking a list is trivial. If your content is being blocked, stop tracking your users.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#105

Post by cirenehc » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 3:55 PM UTC

teknologist wrote: post #85

I’m eagerly waiting for the Brave AI-based blocking to be rolled out. That will hopefully be a start to the end of unwieldy and hard to maintain filter lists in general. I know there are lot of good people who put time into these things, but the blacklisting techniques these extensions use seem rather outdated in 2018.

ML is not magic, it's just statistics.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#106

Post by Fuxy » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 4:09 PM UTC

VMG wrote: post #4

occamrazor wrote: post #2

Adblocking list should be what their name says: lists that match ads (and advertising-related trackers). There is no place in such a list for politically motivated blacklists. Content based blacklists have their place too. Users are of course free to create hate-speech-block, union-block, trump-block, liberal-block, nazi-block or any-other-category-block, but if these lists are distributed through an adblocker they s…

I really wish the internet would be client-side filtered by default, instead of centrally moderated. We'll end up with filter bubbles either way.

I've been telling all the snowflakes since forever "you have a block button use it!".

Seriously the internet should stay true to free speech and allow any content regardless how objectionable it may be to the vocal minority pushing agendas all the time.

If a person gets triggered by something they are free to block the content for themselves and live in their cosy little bubble it's their right but once they start imposing that on others I take offence.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#107

Post by fhbdukfrh » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 4:17 PM UTC

ams6110 wrote: post #78

TorKlingberg wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have tried that. Every other time I tried to book a flight, hotel or buy something I enter my credit card info and got a blank page or an endless spinner. Now I don't know if I have been charged and whether the purchase has gone through. I do not have time to deal with that. Also I ended up white-listing so much garbage just to do basic browsing that it defeated to whole purpose.

Yes the amount of effort to manually whitelist everything needed to make pages work but still not show ads/trackers is too much. I use uBlock with stock default settings. I also have set my browser to purge cookies, local storage, and history every time I close the browser. That's low effort and cuts the annoying crap from websites by a large amount.

If you're using Firefox, check out the containers extension as well. You can isolate sessions or specific websites without worrying about clearing cookies and history. It's not perfect in terms of usability but is a great advancement for plugging privacy leaks

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#108

Post by vertex-four » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 4:29 PM UTC

Fuxy wrote: post #106

VMG wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish the internet would be client-side filtered by default, instead of centrally moderated. We'll end up with filter bubbles either way.

I've been telling all the snowflakes since forever "you have a block button use it!". Seriously the internet should stay true to free speech and allow any content regardless how objectionable it may be to the vocal minority pushing agendas all the time. If a person gets triggered by something they are free to block the content for themselves and live in their cosy little bubble it's their right but once they start im…

The issue is when companies build platforms which are literally designed to allow people to force their views (and often threats) into other people's faces because that "drives engagement" or improves some other bullshit statistic. If companies were to stop doing that, there'd be much less of a push for moderation of those platforms.

Of course, luckily, there's now federated systems like Mastodon which are designed to avoid doing that and to provide the tools for communities to self-organise, meaning one group can have their neofascist server and another their tankie server and the two can block each other and be relatively happy.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#109

Post by jfk13 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 4:29 PM UTC

leetcrew wrote: post #99

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you can see how these are different. The imposition of third party tracking and annoying advertising isn't inherent in the medium of the web; it's been/being altered to be that way. Now, if in order to change your own vehicle engine-oil third-parties made it impossible without viewing advertising and giving personal information up would that be fine with you because some blind people who could disguise themsel…

okay you're right, the analogy doesn't fit as well as i thought when i woke up this morning. at a very high level i do still think there are some similarities. people want to consume a tailored tech experience that costs time and money to put together. they don't want to put in any effort to improve their experience, and they definitely don't want to pay for it. what do we do with/for these people? i say we leave the…

> people want to consume a tailored tech experience

No, in general I don't "want to consume a tailored tech experience".

When I go to a newspaper or magazine site, for example, I want to read the content I've chosen to look at, just as if I'd picked up the paper in a store. I'll "tailor" my experience by choosing which sites to visit and which links to follow, but I do NOT want the news outlet to "tailor" its content based on having tracked my activity across the web for the past year.

I want to be shown the same content as any other visitor to the site, and to be allowed to explore it on my terms, not have some algorithm looking over my shoulder and deciding what to push at me.

Likewise, when I visit a web store, I want to be offered the same range of products, at the same prices, as any other customer. I don't want the store to analyse my interests, demographic details, past purchasing habits, etc., in order to "tailor" its offerings and prices so as to squeeze the maximum amount of money from me.

If and when a use case arises where I do want a "tailored tech experience", then we can talk about how I might pay for it.

Re: Adblock filter rule list modified politically in Finland

#110

Post by cptskippy » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 4:34 PM UTC

occamrazor wrote: post #2

Adblocking list should be what their name says: lists that match ads (and advertising-related trackers). There is no place in such a list for politically motivated blacklists. Content based blacklists have their place too. Users are of course free to create hate-speech-block, union-block, trump-block, liberal-block, nazi-block or any-other-category-block, but if these lists are distributed through an adblocker they s…

Your proposal is for each facet of content you wish to block be an Addon/Extension/Plugin which is completely unnecessary. Today uBlock Origin and other products perfectly handle multiple lists pulled from different maintainers simultaneously.

There is no one central block list, out of the box uBlock Origin uses something like 9 or 10 different lists and the interface has ~50 to choose from. It also has the ability for you to import your own lists form custom sources and to maintain your own.