Live data from Hacker News

Adblock Plus and (a little) more

blog.adblockplus.org

51–60 of 132 posts

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#51
post #48
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just use Firefox? It's available on macOS.

Firefox has poor battery life on macos.

That is a thing of distant past. It runs beautifully natively on M1/M2 chips and has no noticeable difference in power consumption vs Safari.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#52
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i love ublock origin and have used it for years. i recently migrated to macos and was disappointed to find that ublock origin doesn’t work with safari. what’s the best ad-blocking option for safari on macos?

Why not just use Firefox? It's available on macOS.

[deleted]

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#53
post #3

Never forget that Adblock Plus is a commercial product developed by a company which you can pay to get your ads listed as "acceptable ads" which makes them pass the filtering. uBlock Origin is still probably the best tool for blocking ads: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/

i love ublock origin and have used it for years. i recently migrated to macos and was disappointed to find that ublock origin doesn’t work with safari. what’s the best ad-blocking option for safari on macos?

I use Firefox with uBlock Origin on the Mac and it works great, but for Safari the best option I've found is AdGuard (https://adguard.com). However, it is nowhere near as effective as uBlock Origin since Safari did the Manifest V3 thing.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#54
post #35
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is too big. All of the giant tech companies are. This behavior is a symptom of reaching across industries in search of growth. Is there any reason a grocery store should be a movie studio? This sucks the air out of the room for smaller companies to innovate. Search would be much better if it wasn't being shoved down our throat by a single company that controls (or buys access to) all of the panes of glass Amer…

Ok, so if Google is too big and YouTube is split away from Google... who exactly will pay for bandwidth, server and transcoder costs for all the adblocking freeloaders? If you ever tried to host videos yourself, you'll quickly see that it costs a stupid amount of money to manage. Why would a standalone YouTube LLC. allow anyone to access it with an adblocker and without subscription? (People seem to lose their mind o…

> Ok, so if Google is too big and YouTube is split away from Google... who exactly will pay for bandwidth, server and transcoder costs for all the adblocking freeloaders?

If a "business" can only exist when artificially propped up, should it exist?

> People seem to lose their mind on HN every time someone even tries to recommend something as ridicolous as paying for YouTube.

People on HN also regularly endorse Nebula, so it isn't paying that's the problem (if we pretend HN is a monolith).

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i love ublock origin and have used it for years. i recently migrated to macos and was disappointed to find that ublock origin doesn’t work with safari. what’s the best ad-blocking option for safari on macos?

I use Firefox with uBlock Origin on the Mac and it works great, but for Safari the best option I've found is AdGuard ( https://adguard.com ). However, it is nowhere near as effective as uBlock Origin since Safari did the Manifest V3 thing.

> since Safari did the Manifest V3 thing.

More accurately, Safari removed support for webRequest BlockingResponse in 2019. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web...

This was unrelated to Manifest V3, and in fact Safari has not deprecated Manifest V2. Manifest V3 does remove support for webRequest BlockingResponse in Chrome, but I believe not in Firefox.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#56
post #3

Never forget that Adblock Plus is a commercial product developed by a company which you can pay to get your ads listed as "acceptable ads" which makes them pass the filtering. uBlock Origin is still probably the best tool for blocking ads: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/

I learned the other day that the developer(s ?) of uBlock origin don't even accept donation. That's a really dedicated behavior for someone owning on app installed on probably a million devices, that could make money in an instant if he wanted to.

tbh, that scares me, simply because of the potential that one day, someone will offer enough money that it can't reasonably be expected from anyone to decline that offer.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#57
post #3

Never forget that Adblock Plus is a commercial product developed by a company which you can pay to get your ads listed as "acceptable ads" which makes them pass the filtering. uBlock Origin is still probably the best tool for blocking ads: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/

I learned the other day that the developer(s ?) of uBlock origin don't even accept donation. That's a really dedicated behavior for someone owning on app installed on probably a million devices, that could make money in an instant if he wanted to.

True, but it's worth mentioning that supporting the filter list maintainers is encouraged.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#58
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which means eventually they will do something desperate like using WASM on the all pages or requiring DRM trusted by a TPM chip. And adblockers won't work anymore. We are loosing control over the client a little bit more everyday, and given the new generation know only locked down devices, they don't even notice.

Just curious, what more can they do with WASM to prevent ad blockers? Can they prevent an extension that blacks out the ad and waits until it plays out for example?

Create your own VM for execution and rendering, then make sure it runs only trusted signed code. Skip the dom and js entirely.

It's a black box, so ad blockers wouldn't be able to target anything in there without very hard reverse engineering.

We know it's possible because the community can hack the playstation and xbox. We also know it takes a lot of time and resources.

Unlike the consoles, they can just upload a new blob and suddenly, it becomes so expensive for adblock to keep up we lose it.

It will also be super expensive for google, but they can afford it.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#59
It looks like YouTube's dark-pattern marketing strategy (highlighting the "Allow YouTube Ads" button), is they'd rather have you enable ads than pay for premium.

They're getting too greedy with demonetising videos and still making money off of them, to the amount of ads they play; same goes for other streaming platforms.

So far on Firefox with uBlock Origin I haven't come across it.

Re: Adblock Plus and (a little) more

#60

Google is desperate to display ads on YouTube. YouTube videos, even of poor quality, often rank highly in Google search results. This means that Google can double its profits by displaying ads on YouTube, in addition to its search advertising revenue.

I wonder at what point will Google start splicing ads directly into the video feed? Surely there's a way to do it without transcoding the entire file again.

Twitch already does this on the fly and it's a pain to bypass, I think the question is why Youtube hasn't started doing it yet given how effective it is.
Post reply on HN