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

No adblocker detected

maurycyz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 388 posts

Re: No adblocker detected

#261

Post by charcircuit »

kergonath wrote: post #158
charcircuit wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your choice is to stop giving that place traffic.

That’s the thing: I cannot. The whole web is infested with their trackers and their ads. And there is no alternative to YouTube, for example, including for videos that were uploaded before they went completely overboard with ads. So no, I am not giving up on my ad blockers.

>The whole web is infested with their trackers and their ads.

This is an exaggeration. There are ad free alternatives.

>And there is no alternative to YouTube

Youtube has a subscription you can pay for no ads. There other video sites who charge a subscription instead of offering ads too.

Re: No adblocker detected

#262

Post by charcircuit »

oneshtein wrote: post #83
charcircuit wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your choice is to stop giving that place traffic.

This is exactly what my ad blocker does.

Ad blockers typically only block ads, and not the website too. That way people can experience content for free without compensating the creator hy giving them an ad impression.

Re: No adblocker detected

#263

Post by coldpie »

jwr wrote: post #242

I love it. But in the spirit of today's Internet, you should make this message an obnoxious pop-up that requires dismissal with a tiny "X" button that is dark-grey-on-black and placed tactically so as to be the least accessible. The touch target on touch devices should be tiny and slightly off. The pop-up should also fail completely on iPads, covering all the content with a dark overlay but giving the user no way to…

FYI you can nuke all that crap with a simple browser bookmark: https://www.smokingonabike.com/2024/01/20/take-back-your-web...

Re: No adblocker detected

#264

Post by charcircuit »

throwawaygmbno wrote: post #247
charcircuit wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is no societal expectation around what I do with those bytes Yes, there is. If you had a group of 100 people and asked what google.com should look like and showed them how Chrome renders the page and your 80x24 modification does that all 100 would say that yours is not expected. You are still too hung up on these technical details of how things are implemented than how the average person thinks of these things…

All 100 would agree that the website looks better without ads, unless their paycheck came from them. And those that disagreed would still think it in their heads.

And 100 people would agree that Apple selling them an iPhone for free is better than them charging $1000 for it.

People like free stuff.

Re: No adblocker detected

#265

Post by account42 »

rancidcrab wrote: post #216
Vinnl wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I never see ads anywhere (and not just on the web: I never watch regular TV (I don't even have a TV), never listen to ads-supported radio stations, etc.) Ads in public places, bus stops, etc. are kinda hard to avoid unfortunately.

But those are ok. They (usually) don't have sound, auto playing videos, shock content or cover something I want to look at.

No, they are far from OK. You've just become used to that part of the dystopia like others have become used to online ads.

All ads are designed to psychologically manipulate you into acting against your best interest.

Re: No adblocker detected

#266

Post by const_cast »

mahrain wrote: post #214
Freak_NL wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever I open Google's Play Store on Android I get this feeling of walking into some dystopic shopping mall. I hardly ever come there (F-Droid covers all utilities for me, so Google's own app store is really only for official apps from banks, public transport, etc.), so its user hostile design always hits me like a wall of visual noise and clutter. At these moments that feeling that for most people getting bombarde…

What always surprises me is the sheer amount of fake, scammy, apps trying to appear as if they're something else. Trying to steal clicks from users looking for Adblock, VLC or other legitimate apps... it's a mess!

Yes, this is exactly why Google's claims of locking down apps on Android for security are such hot bullshit. Its such an obvious lie.

I don't need alternative app stores to download malware and scams, that play store is full of that. And it's advertised front and center.

Re: No adblocker detected

#267

Post by coldpie »

landgenoot wrote: post #49
est wrote: post #3

I wish browsers could just provide a way to disable javascript after page `onload`. Perhaps only enables js when user clicks something.

Tried to browse a while with NoScript addon. But barely any page loads, so you need to whitelist almost every page you visit, which defeats the purpose. I have been thinking about some kind of render proxy that runs all the JS for you somewhere else in a sandbox and sends you the screenshot or rendered HTML instead. Or maybe we could leverage an LLM to turn the Bloated JS garbage into the actual information you are l…

> Tried to browse a while with NoScript addon. But barely any page loads, so you need to whitelist almost every page you visit, which defeats the purpose.

Nah, this is just straight up false. Many pages work fine with NoScript blocking all scripts. For those that don't, you usually only have to allowlist the root domain, but you can still leave the other 32 domains they are importing blocked. It's actually surprisingly common for blocking JS to result in a better experience than leaving it enabled (eg no popups, no videos, getting rid of fade-ins and other stupid animations).

I won't argue if you think that is too much work, and I definitely wouldn't recommend it for a non-technical user, but it's not nearly as bad as you described.

Re: No adblocker detected

#268

Post by const_cast »

jdprgm wrote: post #59
ksynwa wrote: post #36

I am extremely insulated from ads online and have been for about a decade. Once in a while I have to browse on a device that does not have an ad blocker or most of the times does not even let you install one. Seeing a website that is SEoptimised and heavily ad supported feels like walking into a crack den. That this is the normal experience for the vast majority of users is sad.

I really can't comprehend how aggressive ad blocking isn't the norm and at 90%+ at this point. Whenever someone just doesn't seem to care i'm concerned something is wrong with them. Youtube ad blocking was briefly not working for me recently and the volume of ads just while doing some chores which forced interrupting flow to go manually skip was astounding and enraging. It's like if I was at a quiet library and every…

> I really can't comprehend how aggressive ad blocking isn't the norm and at 90%+ at this point

Mr Krabs voice: money!

No but seriously, if the FBI is telling you to use an ad blocker, use a fucking ad blocker.

My workplace doesn't allow ad blockers for security. Except ads are a MUCH bigger security concern and everyone knows it.

I'm so sick and tired of everyone playing dumb and acting like it's fine. No, it's not fine. Its not okay that Google is serving you a phishing ad that drains your bank account. They should be held liable. Why is everyone acting like their balls have been chopped off?

Do something about it. Minimum is run an aggressive ad blocker. MINIMUM!

Re: No adblocker detected

#269

Post by charcircuit »

kelnos wrote: post #174
charcircuit wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is no societal expectation around what I do with those bytes Yes, there is. If you had a group of 100 people and asked what google.com should look like and showed them how Chrome renders the page and your 80x24 modification does that all 100 would say that yours is not expected. You are still too hung up on these technical details of how things are implemented than how the average person thinks of these things…

A consensus answer to "what should google.com look like?" does not suggest or imply any sort of "social contract". There is not, and has never been, a social contract that says I have to look at the ads served with any website. If you think there is, then I'm sorry, but you're sorely mistaken. Similarly, there is no social contract that says I have to watch commercials while I'm watching TV (not that I've watched lin…

>does not suggest or imply any sort of "social contract"

We were talking about societal expectations.

>I can mute it, change the channel, go to the bathroom, whatever.

You are free to do the same for websites. You can click the x button on the ad, mute the video ad, or change to a different website.

Re: No adblocker detected

#270

Post by const_cast »

toastercat wrote: post #41

I'm torn. I'm not a huge fan of ads and I don't have a lot of respect for the modern ad networks. However this culture of expecting websites to host the data then freeloading off it by blocking the tracking and ads is also a bit ugly. There is an unwritten social contract here. Websites are willing to host and organise a vast number of content because that'll attract an audience for ads. If there are too may freeload…

Its not my responsibility to make your stupid ass business model profitable.

If your business model is stupid, that's not my business. I don't run your accounting department, I'm not your CFO.

Figure it out, or don't. I don't have the time to handhold every corporation I interact with and make sure they're getting their money. They are not babies, and I am not their father.

Post reply on HN