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

The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web

standard.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–445 of 445 posts

Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web

#441

Post by nix23 »

worldsavior wrote: post #436
nix23 wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happy for you that: 1. You trust every ad comes from "google" 2. You think ~everyone/most have ISP-NAT (hint nearly ~no one has it and IPv6 is a thing too (hint 2. those are 38% worldwide)) But you care about uniqueness because of ad-blockers who are used by ~40% of all users, but a IP is "not" unique, nor the browser, OS, resolution and GPU and the combination of all those factors, but NONO the Adblocker is the prob…

The success rate of the algorithm is important. The average person doesn't want to see someone's else ads just because they're in the same network. No one wants to see their kid Minecraft ads. IP are also constantly changing, at least once a month. For sure, they can't rely on one identifier, which is the IP address, because after it changes, all of the data is gone. Also, you say things I didn't say. I said THE IP i…

>IP are also constantly changing, at least once a month.

I don't know from where you have that one sided information (maybe you life in a bubble), but my IP changes never until i leave the router powerless for more then 12 hours.

>An ad blocker already eliminates you to 40% of the internet users, which is a lot.

No it's not, but your screen-resolution combined with GPU combined with OS combined with Browser(Version) combined with Cam/Mic combined with ~location is.

Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web

#442

Post by worldsavior »

nix23 wrote: post #441
worldsavior wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The success rate of the algorithm is important. The average person doesn't want to see someone's else ads just because they're in the same network. No one wants to see their kid Minecraft ads. IP are also constantly changing, at least once a month. For sure, they can't rely on one identifier, which is the IP address, because after it changes, all of the data is gone. Also, you say things I didn't say. I said THE IP i…

>IP are also constantly changing, at least once a month. I don't know from where you have that one sided information (maybe you life in a bubble), but my IP changes never until i leave the router powerless for more then 12 hours. >An ad blocker already eliminates you to 40% of the internet users, which is a lot. No it's not, but your screen-resolution combined with GPU combined with OS combined with Browser(Version)…

> I don't know from where you have that one sided information (maybe you life in a bubble)

I guess it's company dependent.

> No it's not, but your screen-resolution combined with GPU combined with OS combined with Browser(Version) combined with Cam/Mic combined with ~location is.

You said it yourself. 40% of all users use an ad blocker, hence when you use one, the website will know, and you're part of them.

Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web

#443

Post by gigatexal »

happybuy wrote: post #117
gigatexal wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The app works well enough but I deleted it. After setting it all up there’s no mention that it will work without the subscription. There’s no mode to say “continue without the subscription using the free services” just a very large button and a description of the price to subscribe. That’s hella sus. Also the very first screen doesn’t let you opt out of notifications or skip it with “setup later” etc etc — these cust…

Appreciate the feedback. We'll take it on board for improvements in the future. We recently moved to a paid app model with a 30-day free trial available (from a freemium app model). Understand that this is not as appealing as a free-forever product. We found that we had hundreds of thousands of free users and not enough paid users. After developing the app for many years under this model, we had to make some changes…

Other than paying yourselves which makes 100% sense what if any serverside or other costs does this app/plug-in incur if the filtering is being done from within safari?

Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web

#444

Post by freediver »

Eisenstein wrote: post #437
kerkeslager wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Configurable. Remember when you responded to a post about blocking ads by default ? > Internet services are run by ads. Unless we can transfer to a model which is publicly funded or subscription based (even free software needs to pay for servers and employees -- the money has to come from somewhere) then the best we can hope for is an ad-funded service which allows you enough control to turn everything off if you w…

> Remember when you responded to a post about blocking ads by default? It does block ads by default. You then asked about analytics. > Now we get to the point: you support ads, so you aren't actually committed to getting rid of them. I definitely do not support ads. I block them. > The internet existed before internet advertising, and the kinds of websites people built for intrinsic reasons rather than for money were…

> It does block ads by default.

If you open google.com and search for 'mattress' in Brave, you will see Google ads in Brave, by default.

Furthermore, Brave is capable of blocking these ads, but chooses not to, therefore it does not block ads by default.

>> Now we get to the point: you support ads, so you aren't actually committed to getting rid of them.

> I definitely do not support ads. I block them.

"you" was referring to Brave, not yourself. The point is that Brave is a first part ad vendor (showing ads is how it makes money) so for this reason it is not commited to blocking first party ads by default (as it would be ironic I guess).

> Someone pays for everything. Do you have a solution?

Yes, you can chose to support paid search engines and browsers, paid by users, not advertisers.

> I agree. That's why I block them.

Original comment was about which browser is blocking all ads without discrimination, on default settings.

You can make any browser block ads with some effort, through for example extensions.

Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web

#445

Post by Eisenstein »

freediver wrote: post #444
Eisenstein wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember when you responded to a post about blocking ads by default? It does block ads by default. You then asked about analytics. > Now we get to the point: you support ads, so you aren't actually committed to getting rid of them. I definitely do not support ads. I block them. > The internet existed before internet advertising, and the kinds of websites people built for intrinsic reasons rather than for money were…

> It does block ads by default. If you open google.com and search for 'mattress' in Brave, you will see Google ads in Brave, by default. Furthermore, Brave is capable of blocking these ads, but chooses not to, therefore it does not block ads by default. >> Now we get to the point: you support ads, so you aren't actually committed to getting rid of them. > I definitely do not support ads. I block them. "you" was refer…

> If you open google.com and search for 'mattress' in Brave, you will see Google ads in Brave, by default.

It doesn't block all ads everywhere -- I don't know any browser or extension that does. It certainly blocks most of them. I don't see google ads because I don't use google for search (and I also run a pi-hole), so I wouldn't know.

> "you" was referring to Brave, not yourself.

Well 'you' use strange sentence structure and grammar and it doesn't communicate your point clearly -- or you are retroactively changing what 'you' mean after 'you' write it.

> Yes, you can chose to support paid search engines and browsers, paid by users, not advertisers.

Does 'you' refer to 'me'? Because I already do that. 'I' was speaking of browsers and software and services in general. And I already brought up the subscription model but that doesn't work for browsers, apparently. Why don't you make one?

> Original comment was about which browser is blocking all ads without discrimination, on default settings.

Original comment was about browsers blocking ads. I mentioned Brave was built to block ads. You seem to have changed this conversation to be about Brave supporting ads and how if it does then it doesn't 'count' when it blocks them. Try to keep up.

Post reply on HN