Live data from Hacker News

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

0x44.xyz

121–130 of 962 posts

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#121
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being able to run Twitch on it has me switch for brief periods.

You're personally unable to look at twitch on it?

The adblock causes a twitch stream error. I can watch until the first ad. This is annoying, so I switch to vanilla chrome.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#123

Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.

A lot of people seem to believe that switching to a de-Googled Chromium-based browser isn't good enough. I think that's a psyop promoted by Google themselves. Firefox is different enough from Chrome that it's a big jump for people who are used to Chrome. Brave, custom Chromium builds, Vivaldi, etc. are all very similar to Google Chrome, they just don't have Google spy features. The argument that "Google still control…

Isn't that the exact argument behind the Serenity project? I legitimately feel there is a grave issue with the internet if one wallet controls all of the actual development of our browsers. Control over virtually all media consumption mustn't be in the hands of a corporation.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not happening

I don't know, I switched to Safari and it was painful for like two hours and then I stopped thinking about it. The only thing I somewhat miss is the built-in page translate, but I don't need it often enough to be bothered much.

Safari has had built-in page translate for years now. It’ll detect different languages and show a translate option in the site tools menu. Works well.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#125
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in his defense it would have been patched immediately after the first adblocker used it, and he would have gotten nothing at all out of it. Oh wait he got nothing at all anyway ;)

Would be quite different if they patched it and broke important extensions, possibly facing serieous outcry and bad publicity.

Important extensions like, dunno, uBlock Origin?

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#126
post #9

I'd gladly pay for YouTube without ads if I trusted that it would remain ad free, but the track record from various companies on this is not good.

I pay for YouTube premium for my family and there haven’t been any injected ads at all. Only the ones that the video themselves have in, which are also very annoying. I can’t speak for the future, but I’ve had this for probably 5 years and I haven’t seen a single ad, only the videos that I’ve asked to see.

That's what sponsorblock is for

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#127

I did not even realize my ublock origin was turned off. My HOST FILE script did the same service: https://expatcircle.com/cms/privacy-advanced-ublock-origin-w... More concerning is that social fixer was turned off: https://socialfixer.com/ MFGA Make Facebook Great again ;-)

Why the downvote?

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#128
Just use Firefox with ublock origin. On Android too. Nightly has tabs on tablet.

At work I use Edge (MS integration w SSO and all). Edge has some nice features like vertical tabs and copilot. (yes, email writing with AI is nice)

We are allowed Chrome and FF so have those too with ublock on FF. Chrome is 3rd choice if a site really needs it and for testing.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#130
post #81
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a paying subscriber, you are self-identifying as (likely) a higher net-worth. The problem for ad platforms allowing paid opt-out is that the most valuable users leave the network. Then they have to go to advertisers and say, “advertise on our network where all the wealthier people are not.” A brand like Tiffany’s or Rolex (both huge advertisers) aren’t going to opt into that.

A YouTube subscription doesn’t exactly break the bank. Being able to afford it doesn’t make you wealthy. Apart from that, you can bet that YouTube is pricing it in a way that they aren’t losing out compared to ad revenue.

It's a decent chunk of change for the sole purpose of avoiding ads on a single platform that barely pays the people actually producing the content. If you're looking to access premium content and YouTube Music, it's a slightly better value proposition (but only slightly, because YTM sucks, especially compared to what GPM used to be). For that ~$120 a year, you could buy a bunch of Steam games to occupy the same amount of time as your YT habit. Or you could buy a sub to services like Nebula which actually pay content creators decently. Or you could buy an external hard drive, install yt-dlp, and embrace Talk Like A Pirate Day, Groundhog Day-style.
Post reply on HN