11–20 of 47 posts
Ive been burned on this enough times where I know that any weird error that doesn't have an explanation, automatically turn off adblock. 9 times out of 10... works
I thought it was standard to open up an incognito window with everything disabled when debugging.
I've experienced this, and it's a major pain the ass if we are talking about not just testing but making it work for AdBlocker users. In our case once we had to resort to rewording the method name in our REST AJAX API endpoint so it wouldn't contain the word "counter" for it not to randomly fail for adblocker users. Why would an adblocker be so incredibly aggresive as to block random words from urls is beyond me.
Interestingly, adblockers should be careful about doing stuff like this, as lots of sites would love a check as simple as "make a request to /twitter-sponsered-ad-paid and deny access if it fails"
If adblocking is all about user choice then it's only fair that sites have choice to serve that content too. Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock.
Attempting to purposefully disguise that usage goes beyond any accepted ethics of using adblock today.
Interestingly, adblockers should be careful about doing stuff like this, as lots of sites would love a check as simple as "make a request to /twitter-sponsered-ad-paid and deny access if it fails"
Why? If adblocking is all about user choice then it's only fair that sites have choice to serve that content too. Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock. Attempting to purposefully disguise that usage goes beyond any accepted ethics of using adblock today.
no that's not true - it's "easy", as long as you have cooperation from the advertising network. Their ads could do some callback onto the main page.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If adblocking is all about user choice then it's only fair that sites have choice to serve that content too. Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock. Attempting to purposefully disguise that usage goes beyond any accepted ethics of using adblock today.
> Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock. no that's not true - it's "easy", as long as you have cooperation from the advertising network. Their ads could do some callback onto the main page.
Interestingly, adblockers should be careful about doing stuff like this, as lots of sites would love a check as simple as "make a request to /twitter-sponsered-ad-paid and deny access if it fails"
Why? If adblocking is all about user choice then it's only fair that sites have choice to serve that content too. Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock. Attempting to purposefully disguise that usage goes beyond any accepted ethics of using adblock today.
Interestingly, adblockers should be careful about doing stuff like this, as lots of sites would love a check as simple as "make a request to /twitter-sponsered-ad-paid and deny access if it fails"
Since it's like playing whack-a-mole, I think most ad blockers simply don't care if their presence is known.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? If adblocking is all about user choice then it's only fair that sites have choice to serve that content too. Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock. Attempting to purposefully disguise that usage goes beyond any accepted ethics of using adblock today.
> Right now it's incredibly hard for sites to reliably know if someone is using adblock. no that's not true - it's "easy", as long as you have cooperation from the advertising network. Their ads could do some callback onto the main page.
There are also constant updates to counter this. If you check the adblock forums, there are dozens of threads every day about how to get around checks on sites and even disable messages that specifically show up to adblock users.