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

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

0x44.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 962 posts

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#351

Post by homebrewer »

bung wrote: post #111
Etheryte wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the browsers you could be using, giving your data away to sketchy crypto bros should really not be at the top of the list.

Might as well edit and add some suggestions

Maybe take a look at Vivaldi, it's a continuation of the old Opera, with basically the same development team. It's the most user-friendly and configurable option at this moment, they're very responsive to feedback, and are the only organization that doesn't have some horrible privacy violations in the past (maybe excluding Apple, I don't know and don't care, 90% of users on this planet can't run Safari).

Also they are in Norway if you care about that sort of thing.

It's not FOSS, though, at least for now.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#352

Post by worik »

echelon wrote: post #314
pjmlp wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A monopoly achieved thanks to everyone that forgot about IE lesson, and instead of learning Web standards, rather ships Chrome alongside their application.

The answer is antitrust. The FTC / DOJ should strip Google of Chrome. Honestly, they should split Google into four or five "baby Bell"-type companies. They're ensnaring the public and web commerce in so many ways: - Chrome URL bar is a "search bar" - You have to pay to maintain your trademark even if you own the .com, because other parties can place ads in front of you with Google Search. (Same on Google Play Store.)…

Yes to everything except the first statement:

> The answer is antitrust.

Anti-trust is crucial to make the capitalist economy work prperly, I agree

But another answer is "Firefox"

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#353

Post by acdha »

rustcleaner wrote: post #348
burnte wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

>Brendan Eich's hateful hands LOL California Proposition 8 was pretty mainstream opinion back then. Maybe stop with the ex post facto persecution?

Hate can be popular but that still doesn’t make it right. He knew that he was spending money hoping to take away rights from people he knew, to tell some of them that their marriages shouldn’t be allowed, and did it anyway. That’s hateful regardless of how many other people joined him.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#354

Post by [deleted] »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #265
ThunderSizzle wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or rather, don't use YouTube without paying. Youtube isn't free, and unlike a simple blog, requires tons of infrastructure and content creation. None of that is free, and people wanting that to be free is why we're in adscape hell. Edit: I'd love for a competitor to youtube, but there isn't. Rumble isn't a real competitor, and none of my favorite channels place their content there either. I wish there was a youtube a…

> Youtube isn't free Then charge for it like the other streaming services. If they send me ads, I'll block and delete them, manually or automatically, and I won't lose a second of sleep over it. > requires tons of infrastructure and content creation Not our problem. It's up to the so called innovators to come up with a working business model. If they can't, they should go bankrupt.

[deleted]

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#355

Post by worik »

matthewaveryusa wrote: post #341
al_borland wrote: post #66

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.

Websites I use regularly for banking don't work outside of chrome. I've done the pure firefox forray recently but after 6 months it gets tiresome to have 2 browsers and 3 weeks ago Ive admitted defeat for the second time and went full chrome. Who am I lying to -- market cornered, ggwp. It's like trying to eat food without paying a cent to cargill.

> Websites I use regularly for banking don't work outside of chrome.

What countries banks?

I am in New Zealand and have not had that problem in years.

15 years ago I had to edit my user agent string to look like IE (IIRC) for the University of Otago's website (PricewaterhouseCoopers getting lots of money for doing a really bad job)

Makes me wonder have you tried that trick? Less tiresome than switching browsers....

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#356

Post by worik »

autobodie wrote: post #316
al_borland wrote: post #66

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.

> the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome History shows mere boycotts to always be abysmal failures one after another. The only few examples of ostensible outcomes were critically meaningless and necessitate zero-friction alternatives, like when bud light was encouraged to spend a bit of its marketing budget differently — wow, really showed them!! There's no detour for politics.

> History shows mere boycotts to always be abysmal failures one after another

The South African apartheid regime was brought down by boycotts.

The Israeli genocide regime will suffer the same fate if there is any justice left in the world.

Boycotts are very powerful. Users boycotting ads is dismantling the surveillance web.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#358

Post by eikenberry »

matthewaveryusa wrote: post #341
al_borland wrote: post #66

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.

Websites I use regularly for banking don't work outside of chrome. I've done the pure firefox forray recently but after 6 months it gets tiresome to have 2 browsers and 3 weeks ago Ive admitted defeat for the second time and went full chrome. Who am I lying to -- market cornered, ggwp. It's like trying to eat food without paying a cent to cargill.

Why not switch banks or move to a credit union?

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#359

Post by pkaeding »

Melatonic wrote: post #310
nfriedly wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is great on Mac too. You have a point about iPhones, though. It's almost pointless, but not quite: it does get a few features, like cross-platform sync. "Real" Firefox is one of the things that keeps me on Android.

Orion browser using Firefox plugins I have found to work quite well on iOS

I tried to use Orion as my daily driver on Mac OS (instead of Firefox) but I couldn't get the simplelogin extension to work (it wouldn't authenticate to my account). Also, it was slower than FF (I know, everything says that it is super fast, but that wasn't my experience).

After a month or so, I gave up and switched back to FF.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#360

Post by deryilz »

est wrote: post #357

I got downvoted for commenting this, why can't we make a ManifestV2-like framework using .DLLs ? This can enable network control for ad blockers and Google can do nothing about it.

I think the trouble is that certain adblocking features (like skipping ads on YouTube, Twitch, etc) require modifying the page you're viewing in your browser; just filtering network requests isn't enough. So right now a browser extension is the most natural choice for an adblocker, but honestly that might change if browsers keep being so hostile towards them.
Post reply on HN