The sites could track your mouse position and compare it to the position of the element activated now (clicked).
AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
41–50 of 163 posts
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#42Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#43This may not be the best title, it's the desired function of the add-on to generate noise and making tracking and targeting less useful. There is nothing hidden about what it is doing for the user.
I did a slight edit now, hope that makes it more clear.
s/fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users/fork defending users by silently clicking ads
I came here with the revised title assuming malicious intent from the fork. I now know thats not how it works. So my title rename is just a suggestion to further clarify the intent. hth
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#44It took me a long time to come around to using ad blockers. For a long time, my feeling was, "if you don't like ads don't use the web. You owe it to those websites to look at their ads". But then the ads just go so resource intense that I came around and finally installed an ad blocker. This however still feels one step too far. The ad blocker protects me from the resource utilization of ads. But if you're already bl…
People do this more for ideaology reason.
For some people (not me) ads are inherently bad, so it's okay to abuse advertiser.
Just like for some people, copyright are inherently bad, so piracy is not just a way to save several bucks, but a moral duty.
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#45Of all the ad blockers, AdNauseam is the one that is feared the most. If everybody used it, it would kill the industry.
What economic model would you like to supplant the one which is currently serving a whole load of websites to us all for free?
- Stop existing -> many sites only exist for luring users into ads by suggesting value in search engines
- micro transactions
- Abonnements
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#46It took me a long time to come around to using ad blockers. For a long time, my feeling was, "if you don't like ads don't use the web. You owe it to those websites to look at their ads". But then the ads just go so resource intense that I came around and finally installed an ad blocker. This however still feels one step too far. The ad blocker protects me from the resource utilization of ads. But if you're already bl…
People do this more for ideaology reason. For some people (not me) ads are inherently bad, so it's okay to abuse advertiser. Just like for some people, copyright are inherently bad, so piracy is not just a way to save several bucks, but a moral duty.
People also commit terrorist acts and justify it as "ideological".
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did a slight edit now, hope that makes it more clear.
s/fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users/fork defending users by silently clicking ads I came here with the revised title assuming malicious intent from the fork. I now know thats not how it works. So my title rename is just a suggestion to further clarify the intent. hth
I don't understand all this fork talk
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
People do this more for ideaology reason. For some people (not me) ads are inherently bad, so it's okay to abuse advertiser. Just like for some people, copyright are inherently bad, so piracy is not just a way to save several bucks, but a moral duty.
People also commit terrorist acts and justify it as "ideological".
I didn't say I agree on these ideologies. I actually support the website owner's legal right to not serve users with ad blockers who don't pay in any other way.
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#49Something I don't understand: wouldn't clicking all the ads still help build tracking profiles of you? (except, inaccurate ones, which still carry the chance of harming you?)
They seem to compare themselves to TrackMeNot, which Googles random things in the background to try to mess up Google's profile of you — but I always thought that sounded crazy, because what if it looks up stuff that gets you put on a list, or stuff that's outright illegal? I tried looking at the TrackMeNot paper but it 404's.
Another question I have about AdNauseam: people seem to think that if we succeed in abolishing tracking, the web will still be free, just with non-tracking ads. I don't buy that, because ads aren't very profitable as it is. We might end up with wide swaths of the web just paywalled (or worse? If we get to that point, there'll be lots of "innovations" I'm sure). Why don't people demonstrate what a better model would look like, and whether it would work at scale, if they really dislike the current state of the web?
Re: AdNauseam: uBlock Origin fork silently clicking ads on behalf of users
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
People do this more for ideaology reason. For some people (not me) ads are inherently bad, so it's okay to abuse advertiser. Just like for some people, copyright are inherently bad, so piracy is not just a way to save several bucks, but a moral duty.
People also commit terrorist acts and justify it as "ideological".
Still better than people who commit terrorist acts only for money.