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

821–830 of 844 posts

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

#821

Post by robomartin »

commoner wrote: post #772
robomartin wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you think that the only people who's jobs are affected by this theft are those in the advertising industry? I have news for you. Those jobs are not affected at all. Advertising isn't going away, ever. The channels change, but advertising survives. There's plenty pre-internet history on that. The jobs that are affected are those from the sites that rely on ad income to pay for salaries and their costs. If 100% of…

No business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term. And every business owner goes in with the understanding that success is not guaranteed. Hopefully, your friend is keeping track of the increasing popularity of ad blocking and developing alternative sources of revenue to supplement their display ads…

> No business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term.

Typical totalitarian view coming from an artificially constructed moral high ground. Now you want to tell people how to create, finance and run a business. Most people who think this way have never run a non-trivial business in their lives and have no idea what it takes.

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

#822

Post by iso1631 »

npteljes wrote: post #812
iso1631 wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it get rid of the inline sponsors too?

We both know it can't. It does the same as using an ad blocker on YouTube. In case of inline ads, right now you can use SponsorBlock.

Yes, when I say "ad blocker" I mean the suite of extensions which make it usable.

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

#823

Post by commoner »

robomartin wrote: post #821
commoner wrote: post #772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term. And every business owner goes in with the understanding that success is not guaranteed. Hopefully, your friend is keeping track of the increasing popularity of ad blocking and developing alternative sources of revenue to supplement their display ads…

> No business is entitled to survive eternally on its existing business model. Businesses must adapt to changing market conditions if they want to succeed in the long term. Typical totalitarian view coming from an artificially constructed moral high ground. Now you want to tell people how to create, finance and run a business. Most people who think this way have never run a non-trivial business in their lives and hav…

Nope, defending the right to block ads is a libertarian position because it affirms the autonomy of individual internet users. No individual is obligated to go out of their way to enrich another person's business or support the viability of someone else's business model. Please don't make assumptions about my personal life, you have no idea who I am.

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

#824

Post by jerf »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #615
jerf wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another alternative is ask them to turn it down and turn on CC. I wish more of these places would have CC on. Especially if multiple programs are on, you can't have the audio. There's a solution right there , built right in, just waiting.... page in the conversation about how accessibility can be useful to more than just the immediately disabled.

Maybe your sensorium is different than mine, but the motion, flashing, and colors of advertisements are just as irritating as the audio to me. This is especially true in an environment where there are lots of other conversations and sounds to compete with the TV noise. Unless the volume is turned up annoyingly loud, I find the visuals to be the annoyingly loud part: The subdued hues of the painted walls, tile floors,…

It depends on what I'm there for, certainly. Recently I went to a piano bar with friends, and also happened to catch a particular football game. In this environment, you surrendered peace and quiet the moment you selected the restaurant. Fortunately for a football game, the audio is optional anyhow.

If I'm just there to eat, one TV is no big deal to me, but the TV Wall is definitely a distraction.

But at least don't try to have the audio on. As technically nifty as some of the restaurants are that try to have per-table speakers or a streaming option are, CC is still less obtrusive to me.

But of course everyone's mileage will vary.

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

#825

Post by commoner »

robomartin wrote: post #820
commoner wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a site owner publishes content and makes it available free of charge, it is available for visitors to consume free of charge. Your argument shows a lack of respect for the autonomy of internet users, who are not obligated to consume ads just because they are presented alongside other site content, just as TV viewers are not obligated to watch the ads during commercial breaks. Site owners have alternative means of…

I don't like ads. Yet I respect the fact that the product supplier needs them to pay the bills. You don't like ads. You have zero respect for the product supplier. You consume their work product and delete the ads, using an artificially-constructed moral high ground to justify it. The web would not exist if your world view had been dominant from the early days. Few people are interested in paying for anything directl…

I respect the ability of site owners to make their own decisions about how to run their own businesses. I respect the courage it takes for a site owner to accept responsibility for their own decisions. When a site owner chooses to supply content without charging for it and without stipulating that it must be consumed in its entirety without an ad blocker, I respect that. And if some of that content interests me, I will accept the site owner's offer of free content and consume the parts that I want to consume, while ignoring or blocking the parts that I don't.

How I spend my time and attention on the site is my personal decision, not the site owner's decision, not your decision, and not anyone else's decision. I don't care if an unsound and generally unaccepted ethical theory like the one you're advocating for disregards my individual right to spend my time and attention as I please. I don't care if you would rather prioritize someone else's profit over my autonomy. My time and my attention belong to me.

I don't use Gmail, and I would prefer Gmail's user base to be distributed among many smaller companies that compete with each other to provide better products. I don't use Facebook, and I would prefer it to be completely supplanted by fediverse services that don't violate the privacy of users and non-users, and don't create poor working conditions for its contractors.* YouTube is not irreplaceable either, and I would rather see a variety of platforms like PeerTube instances and Vimeo break YouTube's near-monopoly of online video content in the U.S. and many other countries. I fully understand the reality of online advertising, which only amplifies my support for ad blocking.

* https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/25/18229714/cognizant-facebo...

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

#826

Post by jallbrit »

cercatrova wrote: post #186

I have a list of adblockers I use, hope it helps other people here: Desktop: - Pi-Hole (network wide adblocking) - AdGuard (device wide adblocking) Web browsers: - uBlock Origin - uMatrix (not developed anymore but still works, can also use NoScript) - SponsorBlock (blocks in-video sponsor segments, intros, outros, filler tangents, etc in YouTube) Mobile: - Firefox for Android / Kiwi Browser (both have web extension…

Are there any iOS app-based solutions for dealing with YouTube ads? The app you mentioned (YouTube++) appears to require a jailbroken iPhone. I've read that AdGuard Pro can work with mobile Safari YouTube ads, but I'm curious about an app solution. Seems like there's plenty of stuff out there for Android.

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

#827

Post by cercatrova »

Fiahil wrote: post #789
cercatrova wrote: post #186

I have a list of adblockers I use, hope it helps other people here: Desktop: - Pi-Hole (network wide adblocking) - AdGuard (device wide adblocking) Web browsers: - uBlock Origin - uMatrix (not developed anymore but still works, can also use NoScript) - SponsorBlock (blocks in-video sponsor segments, intros, outros, filler tangents, etc in YouTube) Mobile: - Firefox for Android / Kiwi Browser (both have web extension…

How do I block Youtube ads on LG web OS ? Pihole doesn't work, they serve the ads on the same domain as the video content.

You can root your TV and then install apps. Alternatively, you can get a Fire Stick and install SmartTubeNext.

https://rootmy.tv

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

#828

Post by cercatrova »

nicbou wrote: post #781
junaru wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> YouTube Vanced I get why they want to stay anonymous but that website is no different from any other malware site - no source, no authors just some affiliate links. Putting your google credentials in an app like that is not something people should be comfortable with.

Some time ago, the version I installed (from a regular Google search) tried to use my phone as a throwaway number. For around two months I got validation codes for PayPal, confirmation calls from crypto sites and a lot of messages from horny men who click ads on porn sites. It took me a while to piece it back together. The only reason it didn't work is that I refused the app the permission to read text messages.

You likely downloaded a malware version if you just googled the name. The official version is at https://vancedapp.com/.

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

#829

Post by cercatrova »

jallbrit wrote: post #826
cercatrova wrote: post #186

I have a list of adblockers I use, hope it helps other people here: Desktop: - Pi-Hole (network wide adblocking) - AdGuard (device wide adblocking) Web browsers: - uBlock Origin - uMatrix (not developed anymore but still works, can also use NoScript) - SponsorBlock (blocks in-video sponsor segments, intros, outros, filler tangents, etc in YouTube) Mobile: - Firefox for Android / Kiwi Browser (both have web extension…

Are there any iOS app-based solutions for dealing with YouTube ads? The app you mentioned (YouTube++) appears to require a jailbroken iPhone. I've read that AdGuard Pro can work with mobile Safari YouTube ads, but I'm curious about an app solution. Seems like there's plenty of stuff out there for Android.

No, and this is one of the primary reasons I have an Android, and support side loading on iOS. I should be able to install whatever software I want on hardware that I own.

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

#830

Post by scubbo »

sebastien_b wrote: post #611
scubbo wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you're saying, but I think that's actually counter-productive. To present things like uBlock as malware blockers suggests that "any ad which is not malware is fine". I think it's perfectly justifiable to guard against non-malware ads _as well as_ malware (ads or otherwise).

I guess what constitutes "malware" is based on what the ad is doing - if it's benign, it's an ad and I'm fine with that. If it's hostile/tracking scripts masquerading as an ad, then obviously that's a problem. I call it "malware blocking" because of multiple past experiences like I mentioned above, and the way to avoid them is with these "ad blockers" (though I guess a more generic term, like "content blocker", is pe…

> running uBO as a "malware" blocker just happens to siphon up legitimate ads in the same bucket in the process (which is what I think is your point)

My point's actually sort-of the inverse of that. My point is that, by describing uBO as a malware blocker, you are suggesting that "ads that are not malware are fine". That's a position you're entitled to take, but I don't agree with it - +1 to the sibling comment that rightly points out that "ads are malware for your brain". Ads are a problem, and they should be blocked. The fact that you happen to be able to also block malware with an ad-blocker is a happy coincidence - but even if that wasn't the case (i.e. even if ad-blockers _only_ blocked non-malware ads), they would still be good, moral, and justified.

Post reply on HN