141–150 of 304 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much would a Google search cost me if it wasn't ad supported?
Some numbers from 2009 say 1.18 cents/search: https://web.archive.org/web/20110201052634/http://billwarner... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2110938
Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…
tracking != advertising
Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…
Before Google the Internet was more useful. Smaller and more content focused. I'd gladly go back to hotbot or whatever to get away from Google and their ilk.
A combination of disconnect, Adblock pro, and self destructing cookies gets me there.
Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…
Before Google the Internet was more useful. Smaller and more content focused. I'd gladly go back to hotbot or whatever to get away from Google and their ilk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I "did the /etc/hosts" thing for a long time. But it seemed like some things hung and tool longer sometimes. Overall /etc/hosts was a big improvement. Where are the good lists and what is the current thing you map all the bad hosts to (is it localhost, or something else?)?
It hangs because it waits to time out. It will fail faster if you set the IP to something impossible instead of merely unavailable.
It's interesting to think of this as a nuclear option for Firefox. The only incentive they have not to turn it on immediately is that it could poison relationships with site owners such that they stop testing their sites on Firefox or outright block Firefox users, but if Firefox market share ever diminished to the point where site owners were already neglecting Firefox then I see no reason why Mozilla wouldn't damn t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I specifically emphasize on the home page of the project [1]: "uBlock Origin (or uBlock₀) is not an ad blocker; it's a general-purpose blocker." It will report everything to the user -- including behind-the-scene network requests [2]. --- [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock#philosophy [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Behind-the-scene-netw...
So this firefox feature is just a subset of what ublock does? BTW, thanks for ublock.
Man, ads are great. They allow content to be targeted towards people that could potentially not afford the content and towards people that might not necessarily use the product normally. The world is already significantly divided by wealth. Assuming someone poor even has access to a service like Google, imagine if it was behind a paywall. Could they afford it? If not imagine how much of a life advantage someone wealt…
You're trying too hard. Before Google the Internet was more useful. Smaller and more content focused. I'd gladly go back to hotbot or whatever to get away from Google and their ilk. A combination of disconnect, Adblock pro, and self destructing cookies gets me there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And your condescension is irritating. Apple seems pretty solid on the protection of users' privacy. Devices are encrypted by default, for example, and there are robust protections from rogue applications in place. Is there are specific practice that Apple engage in that makes you think they are particularly reckless regarding users' privacy?
He's comparing Apple to Google. In that respect, Apple comes out looking pretty bad. Google's devices are also encrypted by default and have much more robust protections against rogue applications in place (both static and dynamic automated analysis of apps for malware, vs. just a human eyeballing it).
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/03/google-quietly-backs-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And your condescension is irritating. Apple seems pretty solid on the protection of users' privacy. Devices are encrypted by default, for example, and there are robust protections from rogue applications in place. Is there are specific practice that Apple engage in that makes you think they are particularly reckless regarding users' privacy?
He's comparing Apple to Google. In that respect, Apple comes out looking pretty bad. Google's devices are also encrypted by default and have much more robust protections against rogue applications in place (both static and dynamic automated analysis of apps for malware, vs. just a human eyeballing it).
http://blog.lifars.com/2015/03/18/google-now-manually-review...