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

Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

webkit.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 49 posts

Re: Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

#5

Post by derefr »

carlesfe wrote: post #4

Apple: "We will allow ad blockers for Safari in iOS9. By the way, here's our new News app, which serves unblockable iAds"

It does make sense. Apple aren't helping people block ads because they don't like ads; Apple are helping people block ads to "enhance privacy" (and also for "if everyone's gonna do it anyway, it may as well be fast" reasons, but never mind those.)

When a third party serves an ad to a user, the third party gets information about that person (their IP address, etc.) When Apple serves an ad to one of their users on behalf of an advertiser, on the other hand, the third party doesn't get any information at all.

Sure, Apple now knows I saw an ad... but Apple knows a lot of stuff about me; I'm already assuming they're trusted with my personal information the moment I set up iCloud Keychain or Find My Mac. Reducing the number of companies that know things about me down to the bare minimum (i.e. the same number that I actually do business with) is not a bad deal.

...of course, if iOS shipped with a "hosts file"-like configuration point, such that one could block iAds, that'd be a much more interesting world. (And not, strictly speaking, an impossible one; "featureful" VPN-proxy services are becoming more common—even Google is giving one away as part of Project Fi, to avoid "dirty" wifi—and iOS supports system VPNs, so you could set up your ad filtering at the head-end. I have no idea what Apple would do if this became common, though. Maybe just give app developers an API to ask whether "the phone can reach the internet but the ads aren't loading", and switch to a separate "hey stop that" view controller.)

Re: Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

#6

Post by IBM »

derefr wrote: post #5
carlesfe wrote: post #4

Apple: "We will allow ad blockers for Safari in iOS9. By the way, here's our new News app, which serves unblockable iAds"

It does make sense. Apple aren't helping people block ads because they don't like ads; Apple are helping people block ads to "enhance privacy" (and also for "if everyone's gonna do it anyway, it may as well be fast" reasons, but never mind those.) When a third party serves an ad to a user, the third party gets information about that person (their IP address, etc.) When Apple serves an ad to one of their users on beha…

I think it will be a good change if publishers were forced to sell/deliver their own ads. The problem has always been third-party ad networks that track you across the web and sometimes delivers malware. Publishers have never had to take ownership for the ads they serve and the user experience has suffered.

The way forward is native ads (no, native ads aren't advertorials) like podcast ads, radio ads, or sponsored posts on individual blogs like Daring Fireball.

Re: Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

#7

Post by Animats »

This seems like a good idea. The big question is whether the structure can recognize enough ads, and whether it will continue to do so. For example, if a site is using HTTP2 and all the ads come in over the same TCP connection, domain-based blocking may have a problem. If (when) CDNs start doing that, ad recognition becomes tougher.

Re: Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

#8

Post by derefr »

IBM wrote: post #6
derefr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does make sense. Apple aren't helping people block ads because they don't like ads; Apple are helping people block ads to "enhance privacy" (and also for "if everyone's gonna do it anyway, it may as well be fast" reasons, but never mind those.) When a third party serves an ad to a user, the third party gets information about that person (their IP address, etc.) When Apple serves an ad to one of their users on beha…

I think it will be a good change if publishers were forced to sell/deliver their own ads. The problem has always been third-party ad networks that track you across the web and sometimes delivers malware. Publishers have never had to take ownership for the ads they serve and the user experience has suffered. The way forward is native ads (no, native ads aren't advertorials) like podcast ads, radio ads, or sponsored po…

The problem is with publishers too small to individually attract the attention of advertisers... which is most of the ones that use advertising to begin with. Any way to solve that problem reintroduces an ad network in some form or another.

Or would you say that advertising is only for big shots, and small-time publishers should just rely on up-front payment?

Re: Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

#9

Post by kibwen »

Firefox is also dabbling with built-in tracking protection (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9594158). I'll be curious to see how Google faces this trend with Chrome going forward. Apple may be able to get away with enabling users to block web ads while serving them native ads (in the guise of privacy), but if Google tried to do the same (i.e. with Google-served ads being somehow "blessed" by virtue of not sharing your personal details with advertisers) then they'd be painting a target on their forehead for antitrust lawsuits.

Re: Introduction to WebKit Content Blockers

#10

Post by caryhartline »

kibwen wrote: post #9

Firefox is also dabbling with built-in tracking protection ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9594158 ). I'll be curious to see how Google faces this trend with Chrome going forward. Apple may be able to get away with enabling users to block web ads while serving them native ads (in the guise of privacy), but if Google tried to do the same (i.e. with Google-served ads being somehow "blessed" by virtue of not shar…

Is it a guise of privacy when iAds is actually more private? Google has already done this with blocking Flash ads which blocks their own ad network as well.
Post reply on HN