Web page service workers bypass ad-blockers after Chrome 72 upgrade?

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 8:05 PM UTC

nicoburns wrote: post #2

It might sound dramatic, but if they do block or cripple ad blockers, then I think that could represent a turning point in Chrome's popularity. Even my non-technical friends use an ad blocker, and it's also one of the best defenses from viruses on the modern web, so people who do family tech support are likely to be pretty proactive in ensuring that the computers they look after are running browsers with ads blocked.

Post by coolspot » Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 8:14 PM UTC

satokema wrote: post #21

dmortin wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hate Mozilla pushing their own things almost as much as Google (a screenshot service? I have a keybinding for that, thank you) The screenshot feature is quite handy, because it lets you capture only a certain element on the page which is more cumbersome using the OS' builting screen capture, because then you need to edit the captured image.

OSX has a keybind that lets you drag the exact rectangle to capture, so all I do is keybind, drag, upload to my intended recipient instead of Mozilla's servers.

Post by reificator » Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 8:20 PM UTC

dmortin wrote: post #15

nicoburns wrote: post #2

It might sound dramatic, but if they do block or cripple ad blockers, then I think that could represent a turning point in Chrome's popularity. Even my non-technical friends use an ad blocker, and it's also one of the best defenses from viruses on the modern web, so people who do family tech support are likely to be pretty proactive in ensuring that the computers they look after are running browsers with ads blocked.

The majority of people don't use an adblocker (otherwise the ad based ecosystem would not work) and if you ask them if they want to pay for the sites they visit instead of seeing ads then most of them choose free with ads. One visits lots of sites while browsing and paying for each of them is simply not feasible. The solution would be some kind of universal micropayment scheme, but it's unclear how such a sytem could…

Post by gsich » Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 8:25 PM UTC

dmortin wrote: post #15

nicoburns wrote: post #2

It might sound dramatic, but if they do block or cripple ad blockers, then I think that could represent a turning point in Chrome's popularity. Even my non-technical friends use an ad blocker, and it's also one of the best defenses from viruses on the modern web, so people who do family tech support are likely to be pretty proactive in ensuring that the computers they look after are running browsers with ads blocked.

The majority of people don't use an adblocker (otherwise the ad based ecosystem would not work) and if you ask them if they want to pay for the sites they visit instead of seeing ads then most of them choose free with ads. One visits lots of sites while browsing and paying for each of them is simply not feasible. The solution would be some kind of universal micropayment scheme, but it's unclear how such a sytem could…

Post by dmortin » Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 8:31 PM UTC

gsich wrote: post #28

dmortin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of people don't use an adblocker (otherwise the ad based ecosystem would not work) and if you ask them if they want to pay for the sites they visit instead of seeing ads then most of them choose free with ads. One visits lots of sites while browsing and paying for each of them is simply not feasible. The solution would be some kind of universal micropayment scheme, but it's unclear how such a sytem could…

So every site with "disable your adblocker" will display the message just because a "majority" doesn't use them? I find that doubtful. Adblockers are impacting revenue from a considerable amount of users, otherwise there wouldn't be such messages.