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

Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

dhowe.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 253 posts

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#151

Post by forca »

column wrote: post #110
forca wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is something also mean-spirited about tracking users. Yeah, yeah, I've heard it's all anonymous, but I've been in the IT industry for a very long time, and I know for a fact they can identify the users with enough time. Because all of this is bought and sold behind the scenes. I would be OK with ads that went straight to the site selling an item with no tracking other than click-thru stats but not using the IP…

> It's sick that sites show one price to mobile users and another to desktop users. Out of curiosity, which is cheaper?

Desktop generally. Also iPhone users frequently are quoted higher prices than Android users. I've seen this with my own eyes.

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#152

Post by alkonaut »

oliwarner wrote: post #7

Just remember that while targeting the ad networks, you're hurting the small publishers (who can't solicit independent advertising) more than the likes of Google. At least in the mid-term, Google can keep charging the same rate for the clicks and still take their cut. If anything, this is making the networks more money. In the long term, this devalues a click. The very moment things turn, the publisher will bear the…

While this is true, the desired effect should be to push those players to a set of white listed as networks that don't use tracking and other such tricks. If course, the same effect could be done with regular ad blocking, and I think that's way better.

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#153

Post by raldi »

forca wrote: post #142
jbigelow76 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiousity, if you were to go to one of your favorite sites that is currently ad supported, and the site admin presented a popup that states "We've detected you're using an ad blocker, we respectfully request not visiting our site." Would you respect the request or ignore it?

I actually have a subscription in my AdBlock Plus that also kills these "requests". It's called Adblock Warning Removal List.

When you visit a restaurant in a country where tipping is the norm, do you leave a tip?

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#154

Post by sbierwagen »

alkonaut wrote: post #141

The people behind the adblockers should throw their weight around a bit and issue some guidelines for what kind of advertising is acceptable and just whitelist the good guys. I prefer being shown useles add that don't interest me, than being shown ads for the thing I just bought or googled as it is today. Most as networks and advertisers probably find that completely bonkers "but you get consumer information that is…

AdBlock Plus does this: if you pay the author of ABP money, then he whitelists your ads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adblock_Plus#Controversy_over_a...

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#155

Post by jbigelow76 »

jmount wrote: post #115
jbigelow76 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Ads (and even ads placed by primary distributors and authors) hijacked the internet without permission from browsers/surfers Isn't actively visiting a site you know to be ad supported implying permission?

Permission for what? To see a single text ad? To see a series of gifs? To have an autoplay video start? To accumulate tracking cookies? To accumulate permanent flash storage? Permission to do some reverse lookup and call your phone? Permission to capture later browsing and re-write links in a i-Frame? I am not currently using an adblocker/clicker (broke too many things). By a similar argument if the site doesn't want…

    >Isn't something being placed in public implying some permission?
It seems to me like it's a two way street. The site is implying permission to consume the content by placing it out there, we imply permission to have ads served at us by going to the sites knowing the ads are there.

If the site is serving up malware why patronize it to begin with? There is a distinction between an ad and malware.

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#156

Post by eli »

vinbreau wrote: post #83
vertex-four wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do ads in a newspaper "hijack the real world"?

Ex-Advertising layout designer here for Hearst. Ads in a newspaper are typically laid out in a pyramid fashion to specifically avoid breaking up news articles into more difficult to read formats. 'Flow' is important when laying out every page. Ads on the web adhere to no such flow and often inhibit the experience of reading. Newspapers want their ads to be as unobtrusive as possible while still being seen. Advertiser…

It seems like your complaint is about the poor design of news sites (which I generally agree with) more than it is a philosophical objection to advertising.

(There are some print publications with quite terrible ads too. Not everyone has the standards or resources of Hearst.)

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#157

Post by rebel »

ancap wrote: post #143
rebel wrote: post #16

It's a shame this is even receiving front page publicity. This is ultimately terrible for everyone except maybe a few anarchists that think they deserve every websites information for free while sabotaging the publishers who work to develop the sites. And if it actually were to take off, it would then be bad for the anarchists who no longer get that free access to the information they wanted. Who wins? Edit: Seriousl…

>This is ultimately terrible for everyone except maybe a few anarchists that think they deserve every websites information for free while sabotaging the publishers who work to develop the sites. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power

Re: Ad blocker that clicks on the ads

#159

Post by vdaniuk »

greyman wrote: post #123
jbigelow76 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiousity, if you were to go to one of your favorite sites that is currently ad supported, and the site admin presented a popup that states "We've detected you're using an ad blocker, we respectfully request not visiting our site." Would you respect the request or ignore it?

I wouldn't respect it. Because they publish a free content, and are taking advantage of many other Internet services, which provides them with free marketing - search engines, aggregators, social sites, etc. I can download their content and then display any subset I want - that is how WWW works. If they want to prevent me doing that, they should implement a pay-wall.

I believe that you and anyone else should not have moral reservations to visit any site with an adblocker even if they request you not to do that.

>free marketing - search engines, aggregators, social sites

But, judging from this quote you don't know what you are talking about. Search engines and social network traffic is anything but free in any category that has significant competition.

Post reply on HN