Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser • Hacker News Board

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#181

Post by colordrops » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:40 AM UTC

debacle wrote: post #174

heeey wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's ok. If this plan works, a few years down the road Ublock will get dropped/disabled for you under some pretense when Google can claim they've got you covered for "ad blocking".

You're thinking far too 1984 when the answer is much more Brave New World - if the ad blocker in Chrome is good enough, people will just stop supporting UBlock.

Naw, Google has precedent for this sort of behavior, going so far as removing plugins from their web store and quietly uninstalling them from Chrome with no notification when the plugin interfered with their business model. They actively uninstalled video download plugins without notification to the user a couple years back. Nefarious.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#182

Post by mangix » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:41 AM UTC

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #162

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

On mobile Chrome does not support extensions while Firefox does. Recently on acquiring a new phone I used Chrome for a few days -- I had entirely forgotten how terrible the user-experience is without UBlock!

or do adblocking on the router level

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#183

Post by untog » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:43 AM UTC

CoryG89 wrote: post #179

debacle wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're thinking far too 1984 when the answer is much more Brave New World - if the ad blocker in Chrome is good enough, people will just stop supporting UBlock.

No one supports uBlock. Browsers would have to specifically block the extension if they wanted to keep people from using it.

> Browsers would have to specifically block the extension if they wanted to keep people from using it.

Which Google have done to other extensions many times.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#184

Post by altern8tif » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:44 AM UTC

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #162

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

On mobile Chrome does not support extensions while Firefox does. Recently on acquiring a new phone I used Chrome for a few days -- I had entirely forgotten how terrible the user-experience is without UBlock!

Go with Brave on mobile (https://www.brave.com/). They've got an ad-blocker built in.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#185

Post by arielm » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:44 AM UTC

The concept of an ads company blocking "some" ads that _it_ decides aren't good for users sounds a bit like google blocking its competitors, doesn't it?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#186

Post by claroscuro » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:47 AM UTC

sixstringtheory wrote: post #110

claroscuro wrote: post #90

If you go to a restaurant and order a salad, you're not obligated to eat the olives, and you have the right to take them off your plate. Likewise, you have the right to bring an intermediary who looks at your salad and hides all the olives for you. If your intermediary happens to work for Green Olive Co. and he hides the black olives but not the green ones, you have the right to switch to another intermediary. Or get…

Sure, but in your example, you've paid for the salad. The whole reason (presumably) that advertising has gotten in the state it's in is that nobody wants to pay for things, but it costs money to keep the lights on. Full disclaimer: I use things for free day in and day out. I try to pay for things that I find value in as my budget allows. I find many ads annoying.

Yeah, I see how my analogy fails now.

I still don't think there is a moral right or wrong with AdBlockers. Web sites are text--how you choose to render them is (or should be) up to you, in my opinion.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#187

Post by perseusprime11 » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:47 AM UTC

Before everybody gets excited, please read the fine print. They are working with the Coalition for Better Ads and industry trades to support the Better Ads Standards. If anyone is interested, here is the standard: https://www.betterads.org/standards/

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#188

Post by mkl » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:50 AM UTC

_eht wrote: post #126

ohyeshedid wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it is, but if there were the case why wouldn't they start by cleaning up their own platforms? There are several angles to be wary of. Locking out competitors, replacing competitor ads with their own, forcing sites to migrate to, or back to, Google ad networks, etc.

Working with Google ads for over seven years as a publisher, they have one of the cleanest ad networks in the game. On top of that, you can preview every single ad that is shown with your account and block accordingly. I agree, they need to thread carefully, but things need to change, and that change needs to come from two angles: publishers whoring out their users and ad networks not taking responsibility for what t…

> you can preview every single ad that is shown with your account and block accordingly.

Really? I've never used Google ads, so for all I know you're right, but why would none of the ~600 comments in the previous discussion [1] mention that?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14094083

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#189

Post by sounds » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:54 AM UTC

QuinnyPig wrote: post #164

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

I can't imagine this wouldn't lead to one hell of an antitrust lawsuit...

I honestly doubt Google has thought of this.

Their modus operandi appears to be (1) launch edgy experimental stuff, (2) forget it exists, (3) be reminded it exists, (4) ruin it by killing it or rewriting it.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#190

Post by Coincoin » Thu, Apr 20, 2017, 2:56 AM UTC

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

Google are the one who made me install AdBlocker. I was tired of getting the same obnoxious and annoying unskippable 30 seconds ad for a long series of 45 seconds videos on youtube.