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

Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

imlefthanded.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 844 posts

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#711

Post by tzs »

xtracto wrote: post #606
tzs wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had a couple effective strategies to deal with ads on network TV when I was a kid. I've found they they still work today. 1. If I was watching alone I would have a book with me. When ads came on I'd read the book until the ad break ended. Nowadays instead of a book it is usually an iPad, and instead of reading during the break I might work on a crossword puzzle in the NYT Crossword app or do some chess puzzles at…

I have no idea why a successor to TiVo never came out. The idea of "fast forwarding" TV ads was way ahead of its time. I've got cable TV and would pay good money for a service like that. The same applies to Podcast ads: I would pay for a podcast player (like Podcast Republic) that could automatically skip ads, and say let people mark ad segments in a podcast so that others could skip them.

Comcast has some support for skipping ads. It doesn't work for everything, just top shows from NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, CW, Bravo, HGTV, Discovery, MTV and TLC recorded after January 1, 2019 in HD. It's enabled by default on their X1 DVR boxes.

The way it works is that if you start fast forwarding, it automatically stops and switches to play when you reach the end of a commercial break. You watch normally and when a commercial starts just hit FF a few times (the first hit starts forwarding, subsequent hits switch to faster FF speed).

I dropped cable in the middle of 2020. My recollection was that it also only worked if it had been at least 24 hours since the program originally broadcast, but their documentation [1] does not mention any such limit so perhaps they dropped that limit.

[1] https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/dvr-smart-resume

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#712

Post by timbit42 »

oldiphone wrote: post #213

I used to use adblockers but then certain websites stopped working and displayed banners saying to turn of my adblocker, so i did, and then it all seemed kind of pointless.

Try Ublock Origin and learn how to use it's element picker to block any part of a webpage you want.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#713

Post by commoner »

oldiphone wrote: post #213

I used to use adblockers but then certain websites stopped working and displayed banners saying to turn of my adblocker, so i did, and then it all seemed kind of pointless.

Have you tried uBlock Origin recently? In the settings, you can turn on the Unbreak and Annoyances filters to eliminate these anti-adblock banners. I haven't encountered one in a long time.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#714

Post by timbit42 »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #452

I experience this on my phone where adblock doesn't work that well. It's absolutely horrible to use the web there. The screen is already small, and then it gets filled with overlays getting me to use an app, ads, autoplaying videos, ... I'm at the point where my phone is just an alarm, instant messenger and casual camera, since other apps are also full of annoying ads.

If you're using Android, install Firefox and the Ublock Origin plugin. I use it for watching ad free YouTube videos as well, instead of the YouTube app.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#715

Post by HWR_14 »

pwython wrote: post #473
marcodiego wrote: post #278

I wanted to show a video on YouTube to a friend. He passed me his cellphone. I searched and found the video and then something very strange happened: a completely unrelated something started playing. I said "Sorry I don't know what is this. This has nothing to do with what I wanted to show you." He then explained me that was just an advertisement and the video would play soon. People are used to abuse. My internet is…

Just curious, if you owned YouTube with an overhead of tens of millions of dollars per year, how would you monetize it without ads/commercials, just to even keep up with operational costs?

Just to keep up with operational costs? Throw up banners like Wikipedia asking for money, occupying the top bar until I hit my funding goal.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#716

Post by yreg »

freebuju wrote: post #674
yreg wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't understood me. I found it ridiculous playing in a restaurant. It was muted anyway. However, if I was at home, opened YouTube just to entertain myself and opened one of the algorithm suggested videos, then – in that situation – an interesting video from a channel that is unknown to me, inserted as an ad could hook me and could lead to me subscribing to said channel.

I think I got what you narrated. The element of surprise is your response to recognizing MKBHD's content playing at an unexpected unusual venue. Instead of that suggestive ad being inserted into the video. Why not use auto-play or recommended videos section? Suggested videos in the menu work great, better even, in your case scenario for content discovery. I don't watch YouTube with ads and I don't subscribe to YouTub…

No, we still don't understand each other. Sorry.

I'm not happy about seeing MKBHD's video in that restaurant, I don't care at all. I also don't care about seeing that ad (or any ad for that matter).

The original comment I was replying to mentioned watching a 40 minute music video placed as a YouTube ad. I chimed in with my experience of seeing a long tech review video placed as an ad.

>I found it pretty smart, because I can imagine myself succumbing to watching a full video that was inserted as an ad if it's interesting enough.

I'm not praising the ad as a user. I'm explaining why it might be smart from the POV of the advertiser (in this case MKBHD), because it serves their goals.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#717

Post by aembleton »

intsunny wrote: post #19

With Chrome's crippling of adblockers via their Manifest V3 mandate, I wonder if Chrome users are in for a rude awakening of how hostile and repugnant the ad laden web has become.

Doubt it - with manifest V3, most of the adverts will still be blocked. I expect more are getting through with Chrome already because of CName cloaking and uBO not being able to uncloak on Chrome.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#718

Post by danShumway »

chrisseaton wrote: post #677
danShumway wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at which point it's their property This is a big part of why the implicit deal argument doesn't really make sense. If a website sends me information then the information is on my device just like a letter, so I should be able to do what I like with it. The framing of this as an agreement between the user/publisher that we accept or reject skips over the question of whether it is even possible or moral in the first…

I think you're exaggerating my point of view. Do I think it's fine to walk away during an advert break on a US TV station or to mute? Yeah that's fine. Can you cut up your magazine and reconstruct it with the advertising pages removed? Yeah fine. Both are different from advert blocking because of the automation and the specific targeting of the workaround. I think that's where it crosses into not as morally reasonabl…

> because of the automation

I think that's a really arbitrary line. Screenreaders skip ads. Scrapers/apis skip ads. There isn't a clear division between an automated tool and a tool with manual intervention.

In some ways this feels like the same legalism that popped up in spam phone calls where to get around auto-dial rules businesses would have someone on their end sit in a room and press a button over and over to complete the call. In the exact same way, we could imagine a version of Ublock Origin where every time the page loads it comes up as a blank screen, and then I hit a button on my keyboard, and then the screen renders without ads. I don't think that advertisers would see a difference between those systems.

Remember that from the perspective of the advertiser -- the person actually paying for the content -- you walking out of your room during a TV commercial and a piece of software skipping the TV commercial are the same thing. The advertiser does not see a distinction between those actions because the advertiser is not paying for content in exchange for the privilege of streaming data to your computer, the advertiser is paying for content in exchange for your attention.

It is weird to me that people are able to latch on to the idea that ad-blockers "steal" content from web-hosts, but don't view circumventing advertising through other means as stealing money from advertisers. The most charitable explanation I can come up with is that when we say that it's fine for people to block content manually but not using user agents, what we are effectively saying is that it's fine for them to ignore ads as long as they're not particularly good at ignoring them. But even that isn't a great argument.

Is it fine for me to pay an assistant to cut up my magazine after I take it out of my mailbox and reconstruct it without the advertising pages? What if I make a machine with image recognition that does the same thing? It just doesn't make sense to say that ad blocking is moral right up to the point where it becomes efficient, and then it becomes immoral.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#719

Post by chrisseaton »

danShumway wrote: post #718
chrisseaton wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're exaggerating my point of view. Do I think it's fine to walk away during an advert break on a US TV station or to mute? Yeah that's fine. Can you cut up your magazine and reconstruct it with the advertising pages removed? Yeah fine. Both are different from advert blocking because of the automation and the specific targeting of the workaround. I think that's where it crosses into not as morally reasonabl…

> because of the automation I think that's a really arbitrary line. Screenreaders skip ads. Scrapers/apis skip ads. There isn't a clear division between an automated tool and a tool with manual intervention. In some ways this feels like the same legalism that popped up in spam phone calls where to get around auto-dial rules businesses would have someone on their end sit in a room and press a button over and over to c…

> I think that's a really arbitrary line.

Yeah - we're talking morals!

You won't find a mathematical equation to define the moral line.

> ad-blockers "steal" content from web-hosts

Not sure who you're quoting there but it's not me. I don't think it's stealing, I just think it's morally dubious. I didn't say anything like I thought it was criminal.

> Is it fine for me to pay an assistant to cut up my magazine after I take it out of my mailbox and reconstruct it without the advertising pages?

I think so yes.

> It just doesn't make sense to say that something is moral right up to the point where it becomes efficient

Well yeah, again it's morality, it's human and fuzzy.

Automation is often a line for morality. Some people think automated (as in drone) weapons are immoral but a soldier acting on the ground is ok. Some people think automated speeding cameras are unfair but a police officer with a speed gun is ok.

This isn't some kind of new idea.

Re: Adblocking people and non-adblocking people experience a different web

#720

Post by propogandist »

Enginerrrd wrote: post #517
fartcannon wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Firefox on mobile supports ublock origin. Or do you mean the app? Don't use the app.

I don't think it works on iOS. Works perfectly on Android though!

Brave is the only iOS browser that supports ad-blocking on YT
Post reply on HN