Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
techcrunch.com
Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#2I've definitely noticed family being far less likely to be scammed or click fake ads with ad blocker on.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#3What would the end result be if a significant percentage of people started using ad blockers? I mean like 50-60%,enough to make the current "free" web non viable to run. Litigation against the end users? What happens if I'm legally required to view an ad that gives me malware?
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#4Here’s an idea: All the websites start using Widevine and FairPlay to make blocking ads a DMCA Violation. When that happens the absurdity of the DMCA might finally be forced to end.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#5What would the end result be if a significant percentage of people started using ad blockers? I mean like 50-60%,enough to make the current "free" web non viable to run. Litigation against the end users? What happens if I'm legally required to view an ad that gives me malware?
The more likely scenario is that browsers effectively ban or restrict ad blocker extensions. Apple already refuses to support browser extensions on their mobile OS, and Google does not allow extensions on Chrome mobile, and we already know mobile accounts for a significant portion of web traffic.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#6What would the end result be if a significant percentage of people started using ad blockers? I mean like 50-60%,enough to make the current "free" web non viable to run. Litigation against the end users? What happens if I'm legally required to view an ad that gives me malware?
The more likely scenario is that browsers effectively ban or restrict ad blocker extensions. Apple already refuses to support browser extensions on their mobile OS, and Google does not allow extensions on Chrome mobile, and we already know mobile accounts for a significant portion of web traffic.
> Apple already refuses to support browser extensions on their mobile OS
It's going to be interesting to see how Apple deals with this now that the EU is forcing them to allow users to install apps from alternate sources.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#7Here’s an idea: All the websites start using Widevine and FairPlay to make blocking ads a DMCA Violation. When that happens the absurdity of the DMCA might finally be forced to end.
I always turn off DRM. If the content is only available via DRM, I won't watch it. End of story.
My ISP also offers TV for "free". I used to watch it, but recently they switched to a DRM player and I won't use it anymore. I told them about this, but they don't care. My attention is better spent somewhere else.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#8Here’s an idea: All the websites start using Widevine and FairPlay to make blocking ads a DMCA Violation. When that happens the absurdity of the DMCA might finally be forced to end.
Why does adding DRM change something's status under DMCA? Either way, I don't even compile Widevine into my browser so I guess I'd just be locked out of those sites.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#9What would the end result be if a significant percentage of people started using ad blockers? I mean like 50-60%,enough to make the current "free" web non viable to run. Litigation against the end users? What happens if I'm legally required to view an ad that gives me malware?
The more likely scenario is that browsers effectively ban or restrict ad blocker extensions. Apple already refuses to support browser extensions on their mobile OS, and Google does not allow extensions on Chrome mobile, and we already know mobile accounts for a significant portion of web traffic.
> Apple already refuses to support browser extensions on their mobile OS
My iOS Wipr extension begs to differ.
Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker
#10I've definitely noticed family being far less likely to be scammed or click fake ads with ad blocker on.
Given the prevalence in the real world of scams and fake ads - is there a danger that hiding them from people just means that they are more likely to fall for them when the inevitable happens.
Any time I hear of a new scam, I tell people about the method so they can look out for it. In the heat of the moment the "IRS tax problem call" or "its me your child I have been in an accident can you send me some money" can be convincing.