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

Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

stackdiary.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 486 posts

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#101

Post by piva00 »

rovr138 wrote: post #44
ModernMech wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are the ones doing the work. They certainly have a choice not to.

The same engineers doing this in exchange for money, healthcare, etc to put food on their tables and provide for their families? Not everyone has the ability to act on said 'choice' and risk their jobs, income, benefits.

There's a difference between a struggling worker earning a low salary, with low prospects of finding a better position being asked to do unethical things on behalf of their employer, and a Google engineer earning multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

I have refused to implement unethical code when I earned US$8.8k/year and supported my mother (living in Brazil, beginning of my career), I believe a Google engineer has much more leeway and money sloshing around to decide it's not right to do something unethical, and be vocal about it. There's much more of a choice than I had at that time and if I managed to choose to not be an asshole doing unethical bullshit, and didn't starve my family in the process, they are pretty damn able to do it as well. Might need another job but c'mon, you have Google in your CV, jobs will come, stop being a greedy pig.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#104

Post by EvanAnderson »

irusensei wrote: post #66

> Websites funded by ads require proof that their users are human and not bots...Social websites need to differentiate between real user engagement and fake engagement...Users playing online games want assurance that other players are adhering to the game's rules. The whole ad based web industry is really desperate to authenticate humans from bots isn’t?

It’s not authenticating humans, though— just sanctioned software and hardware.

There’s no reason you couldn’t hook a bot up, via video feed and inputs, to an “attestable” device and have it use the Internet that way. This just raises the bar on bot sophistication.

In another thread somebody talked about pointing a camera at a phone and using a robot “finger” to interact with it. If anything WEI would make that easier because you’re not getting CAPTCHAs anymore! You’re a “human”, after all.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#105

Post by Kutsuya »

nfriedly wrote: post #57

I hate to say it, but if you used Chrome to read this, then you're part of the problem. Awful stuff like this wouldn't stand a chance if Google didn't have such a near-monopoly position. For the sake of the open internet, please switch to a different browser. IMO, Firefox is best*, but even something chromium based is probably fine. Just not Google Chrome. * On desktop - Firefox is a bit weaker on Android, with an ex…

People need to be more aware about this. I also use Firefox on the desktop. On Android I use Mull, which is based upon Firefox and it's actually pretty good!

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#106

Post by capableweb »

Zambyte wrote: post #93
capableweb wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Firefox is owned by Google You're gonna have to explain why you think this, because publicly, Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. But maybe you know something the rest of us don't?

> Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. Who owns Mozilla? Put another way, if Google stops funding Mozilla, will it still exist? The only reason Firefox exists is because Google wants something they can point to in court and say "look! we're not a monopoly!"

Mozilla is two parts, the Mozilla Foundation and a subsidiary which is Mozilla Corporation. Neither of those are "funded" by Google.

I'm guessing you're referring to the search partnership between the two? That doesn't mean that Google owns Mozilla, unless you're really unclear about what "partnership" or "deal" means. Mozilla have multiple deals with search engines, not just Google.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#107

Post by stevage »

nextlevelwizard wrote: post #88

How does this prevent ad-blocking? If website you visits asks you to confirm that you are a human user from some 3rd party API isn't that same as requiring captcha? You can still have browser extensions that filter the ads away after the website sends you the final HTML, right?

>You can still have browser extensions

Not if there's only one browser that you're allowed to use, and it's owned by the world's largest advertising company.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#108

Post by scrollaway »

nfriedly wrote: post #57

I hate to say it, but if you used Chrome to read this, then you're part of the problem. Awful stuff like this wouldn't stand a chance if Google didn't have such a near-monopoly position. For the sake of the open internet, please switch to a different browser. IMO, Firefox is best*, but even something chromium based is probably fine. Just not Google Chrome. * On desktop - Firefox is a bit weaker on Android, with an ex…

> I hate to say it, but if you used Chrome to read this, then you're part of the problem.

Victim blaming BS.

Let's see who else is the problem. How about all those engineers who decided not to contribute to Firefox? Or all those website developers who didn't test their site in Firefox? Or hell, why not all those Mozilla engineers who didn't fix Firefox hard enough?

Let's put the blame where it actually is. Google is to blame. Not the users of their free products they advertise all over the place and have an unlimited marketing budget for.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#109

Post by hpaavola »

Zambyte wrote: post #93
capableweb wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Firefox is owned by Google You're gonna have to explain why you think this, because publicly, Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. But maybe you know something the rest of us don't?

> Firefox is owned by Mozilla which is not owned by Google in any way. Who owns Mozilla? Put another way, if Google stops funding Mozilla, will it still exist? The only reason Firefox exists is because Google wants something they can point to in court and say "look! we're not a monopoly!"

Yes, Mozilla would exist if their deal with Google would end.

Re: Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible

#110

Post by ben_w »

Zambyte wrote: post #81
nfriedly wrote: post #57

I hate to say it, but if you used Chrome to read this, then you're part of the problem. Awful stuff like this wouldn't stand a chance if Google didn't have such a near-monopoly position. For the sake of the open internet, please switch to a different browser. IMO, Firefox is best*, but even something chromium based is probably fine. Just not Google Chrome. * On desktop - Firefox is a bit weaker on Android, with an ex…

[flagged]

I don't know where you got that idea from (accepting money to make the Google search engine the default?), but Firefox is made by the Mozilla Corporation which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Mozilla Foundation.
Post reply on HN