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

Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

palant.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 192 posts

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#181

Post by cbsmith »

heromat wrote: post #63

He surely just forgot to mention that Google allegedly payed 25 million € to Eyeo GmbH, the company behind Adblock Plus, in order to participate in the "acceptable ads" program, a "feature" which is turned on by default and allows users to "surf more comfortably". And that he is (or at least was) one of the directors. I'm most certain that there are people out there who would call this business model "blackmailing",…

I think there are people out there that would call this business model "finding the least objectionable and most useful way for users to fund the development of the tool they value".

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#182

Post by 616c »

hyyypr wrote: post #168
616c wrote: post #31

If people prefer more extreme solutions: I eventually moved to Conkeror (think Firefox, but with Emacs bindings and Emacs-like extension via javascript; I know cue the egg throwing). I was looking at other browsers to replace Firefox, as I got sick of it, and I picked Conkeror. Conkeror has a neat little feature called content-policy. I can block kinds of crap per session or site (Flash, JS, Fonts, Object tags, Image…

Lots of info here thanks! I currently use the list provided here [0] which is pretty comprehensive, and just append it to my /etc/hosts file manually; updating it evry now and then is good enough. My question is, why do you need dnsmasq (other than for speeding up dns queries), and why do yo need to serve a blank page instead of simply redirecting network requests to /dev/null? And I use uzbl [1] for browsing, which…

Well, the dnsmasq I can use for other things. I think I read on the Arch Linux BBS it would improve performance and speed, but I am claiming empiricism on someone else's behalf which is the descent into a badly administered computer.

The blank page serving is one parth aesthetic, one part performant. It looks better, and also certain Javascript items (for instance very persistent stuff like Google CDNs and the other players) time out even with this sometimes. Without, many pages would take ages to load with timeouts in HTML, CSS, JS, you name it.

So, it sounds like we are in a similar boat, so I thought I would let you check out my rig. I tried to get into uzbl, but Conkeror and LuaKit were more my style. I kept adding and removing LuaKit, because there is something I feel at home with in Conkeror (I think it is the Xulrunner/Firefox core, so I have been deploying custom kiosks in computer labs with auto-login and heavily modded Firefox instances with crazy user-pref for ages now).

Of course the mileage of others will vary.

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#183

Post by takeda »

wreegab wrote: post #154
dudus wrote: post #138

Blocking ads is such a dick move. This should be made illegal. You are not entitled to change a website to your contempt and cut their main revenue source. If you want to use a website/app and it was made available with the Ad, then just suck it in or use a different one. To my eyes this is not very different than piracy. Where you use a software without paying for it's price. Advertising is the price you pay to use…

> Blocking ads is such a dick move. This should be made illegal. A law to enforce one very specific business model is a terrible idea. If only I could tip $2 the author for that video I watched and liked (like say, 10,000 other viewers) with as little overhead as possible... No donations, no subscriptions, just a tip with no further obligations. You think ad brokers would welcome this business model?

You probably were implying this, but just in case you didn't, this might actually be quite possible right now through crypto currency.

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#184

Post by martin56 »

Karunamon wrote: post #171
martin56 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's right, you didn't say that. You said there is a "public" and a "private" list. To me this sounds like the "private" one is somehow hidden from the public and cannot be seen which isn't the case.

There is no list of sites which utilize the header and do not appear on the main allow list.

It's a whitelist for parked domains...

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#186

Post by crystaln »

radley wrote: post #107
heromat wrote: post #63

He surely just forgot to mention that Google allegedly payed 25 million € to Eyeo GmbH, the company behind Adblock Plus, in order to participate in the "acceptable ads" program, a "feature" which is turned on by default and allows users to "surf more comfortably". And that he is (or at least was) one of the directors. I'm most certain that there are people out there who would call this business model "blackmailing",…

AdBlock Plus sold out. Google's Sponsored features continue to be automatically white-listed as part of that deal, even when "acceptable ads" is not selected. You can't block them using Element Hiding Helper. AdBlock Edge is the only true ad blocker: http://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1mcsko/adblock_edge...

> "even when "acceptable ads" is not selected. You can't block them using Element Hiding Helper."

Is this true? After disabling the non-obtrusive ads, I don't see any ads anywhere. Can you give an example of an ad bypassing this feature entirely?

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#187

Post by webwanderings »

gorhill wrote: post #96
webwanderings wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone here replaced Adblock+ and Ghostery with only uBlock? I'd prefer least minimum extensions when possible. Does uBlock provides what Ghostery does? Or do I have to get SwitchBoard to have the Ghostery alternative?

I run benchmarks to drive development. So you may want to look once in a while at that page: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/%C2%B5Block-and-other... The raw data is published at the top as a spreadsheet, and from it you could see what one blocks that another didn't block or vice versa. So using the raw data of the latest benchmark, here is the diff: http://www.diffchecker.com/ibszp9gf Of course, this is for t…

Some updates ..

From an average user perspective, I tested both uBlock and SB. I used uBlock with Ghostery. They both seem fine and easy to work with. I then installed SB on its own (disabling uBlock and Ghostery). I did not like the results. Out of the box, without changing any settings, I was seeing Ads images on Facebook and other places.

I am going to stick with uBlock and Ghostery for now. I am happy to see your efforts with uBlock/SB. I hope you get to a point where you can have single product in a simplified manner so even an average user could use it without worrying about anything technical.

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#189

Post by tripzilch »

mhaymo wrote: post #83
zz1 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but whitelist is supposed to be for unobtrusive and not tracking ads. Then Google pays and… it is on whitelist! I cannot help but think that by using ABP instead of Adblock Edge you are giving ABP developers means to blackmail advertising companies. And not getting the protection you want in the first place.

That's not my understanding of how it works. You cannot pay to get obtrusive or tracking ads on the whitelist. If you are a large company (how exactly that's defined isn't clear), you need to pay to get your unobtrusive ads whitelisted. https://adblockplus.org/en/acceptable-ads

> You cannot pay to get obtrusive or tracking ads on the whitelist.

> If you are a large company (how exactly that's defined isn't clear), you need to pay to get your unobtrusive ads whitelisted.

Yeah that's a pretty clear conflict of interest, isn't it?

And it's violated right there with Google because the type of tracking ads that Google Ads are shouldn't have been allowed. For a non-paying party. As long as they stay true to their self-imposed rules for "acceptable ads".

Re: Which is better, Adblock or Adblock Plus?

#190

Post by strcat »

freehunter wrote: post #98
jafaku wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But HTTPSB is only for Chrome? If so, meh.

Yeah, why would I go through all the effort to block advertising, tracking, and other ways of monitoring what I'm doing and then after all of that, use Chrome? I don't try to hide myself from Facebook then make a post about it on my friend's wall...

Chromium doesn't have any disadvantages in terms of privacy and security compared to Firefox and other open-source browsers. In fact, it has much more focus on security including a robust sandbox implementation and features like JIT hardening. Can you elaborate on the point you're trying to make?
Post reply on HN