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

Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 37 posts

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#21

Post by tracker1 »

yummypaint wrote: post #15
thatguy0900 wrote: post #3

What 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 nature of advertising will become more "native" and will make it harder to separate ads from the content. We are already on our way. Real businesses will be mostly unaffected. People will still need to buy airline tickets, insurance, widgets, etc online. If facebook collapses nothing of value will have been lost. If google isn't able to stay afloat without ads despite billions in R&D funding then they were never…

That, and/or first-party hosted ad delivery.

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#22

Post by blitzar »

HPsquared wrote: post #11
blitzar wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's a bit like vaccination, educating people people about the various scams out there so they are prepared in advance.

Exactly, our system for ads and scams works in the same way as the immune system.

Personally I think I have one of those hyperactive immune systems that starts to eat its host alive, having told my actual bank to f off and stop ringing me to try scam me when a payment really didnt go through.

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#23

Post by blitzar »

idrios wrote: post #17
blitzar wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> is there a danger that hiding them from people just means that they are more likely to fall for them when the inevitable happens. Probably, but there's so much variance in human behavior and circumstances that your vulnerability to scams never drops to 0. A call telling you your child is in the hospital and you need to pay them because their check has bounced sounds a lot more convincing during times when you know…

And the way these scams are done is en-mass, creating a (high) probability that they hit sommeone already primed to fall for it.

A not so recent example ... https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/hi-mum-scam-tricks-parents...

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#25

Post by zamadatix »

blitzar wrote: post #10
agtorre wrote: post #2

I'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…

My general advice is "If you didn't initiate the conversation with the party with the intent to take an action or exchange money and they want you to do those things then don't take action or exchange money until you reach back to that party via their official lines of communication or otherwise verify the situation makes sense". In the end it's not the method you use to scam someone that matters it's that you trick them into trusting you really represent something/someone you do not. This also helps with not-exactly-a-scam scams like special offers you didn't seek out but are being sold to you because it gives more time to think if it's really a good deal or think what the downsides would be.

You can give 1,000 examples of how fake urgency is created to make you skip that verification step but past the first one or two to explain the general concept of needing to verify it doesn't matter it just means you'll need 1,001 examples to give the next day.

This isn't bulletproof either but I haven't found anything generally applicable that solves the problem better without making more of a problem than it prevents on average.

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#27

Post by wildrhythms »

chrisbolt wrote: post #9
wildrhythms wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The last time I looked at Wipr it still wouldn't let me block an individual element or set up my own filter. And what I'm calling a browser extension must be quite different from Apple's recent definition.

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#28

Post by blitzar »

zamadatix wrote: post #25
blitzar wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My general advice is "If you didn't initiate the conversation with the party with the intent to take an action or exchange money and they want you to do those things then don't take action or exchange money until you reach back to that party via their official lines of communication or otherwise verify the situation makes sense". In the end it's not the method you use to scam someone that matters it's that you trick…

The times that one is most exposed is when the circumstances all line up - through luck and the law of large numbers ... you submitted your tax return 2 weeks ago, you did some things you are sure are right on the line, you get the scam tax man phone call - you are primed then to fall for it.

The trust and fake urgency really is the method of the scam (or ad!) - always verify!

Re: Even the FBI says you should use an ad blocker

#30

Post by officeplant »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #29

Another reason why browsers other than Safari should allow extensions on iOS. Using Firefox does not allow me to use the same protection as Safari itself. Ridiculous.

In my experience even the add-ons I can find for Safari on iOS rarely do what they say they will do. Nothing ever works as well as ublock origin on a desktop browser and it so frustrating. Having mobile firefox + ublock is one of the few things I still miss about android.
Post reply on HN