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

Adblock Plus now sells ads

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 388 posts

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#291

Post by hackernews2000 »

KORraN wrote: post #212
jagger27 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A word of warning about uBlock for those who aren't aware: uBlock Origin forked off of uBlock some time ago and left the Safari version behind. For Chrome and Firefox uBlock Origin is great, but for Safari I personally suggest Wipr[1]. 1: https://safari-extensions.apple.com/details/?id=com.giorgioc...

Actually, uBlock Origin comes from original author of uBlock. Some time ago he said that he doesn't have time to develop Origin and passed project to other guy. Unfortunately, that guy didn't make any big changes in code (except adding himself as an author) and asked for donations. After quite big drama, original author came back, but he wasn't able to get back his project so he called it uBlock Origin.

It's worth noting that it all started on APRIL FOOL'S DAY (2015). That was the convenient day the author of the project decided to say in the comments for a random Github commit "hey, anybody wants to take this over? I'm out", without any previous discussion or announcement. Users assumed it was a joke but it was for real. Literally the first person to reply took over the entire project, and when the developer who was the real responsible for the Firefox and Safari port saw it, he stopped contributing instantly.

However, it's not that "the original author wasn't able to get it back". He is too proud of himself to admit the big mistake it was to give up the project to a random greedy teenager (who after the drama offered to give it back), so he decided to stay with the Origin name.

The result of this is that said teenager still makes a profit off the brand name (see ublock.org). People see that page and happily give him money thinking that they are helping the world.

By the way, it's also worth noting that the greedy teenager inflated his Github commits with minor changes and by hijacking the authorship of some commits, so that people would think that he did more than he actually have done (he can't really do much), and donate more to him. Eventually he just stopped making commits at all (https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/graphs/contributors), since people will still donate just for thinking that his domain is legit.

The moral of the story is that uBlock Origin is a good extension, but its developer, despite being talented, can't be trusted to be here tomorrow. He can just have a tantrum and delete the entire project or give it up to some other random teenager again.

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#293

Post by bargl »

jwise0 wrote: post #251
bargl wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want to go out there and say, they don't have the right to poison you, but you don't have the right to their content... I fall in this weird spot with ads. I don't like them, they slow down the experience, they can have PORN on them (this happened to my brother the other day), they have little oversight and track you. Many things I do not approve of. What I DO approve of is paying content creators. And unless…

I think I agree with at least some of what you say. I feel bad viewing content from small blogs without "paying" for it. My current best compromise is that I run uBlock Origin with an exemption for Google, and then I use Contributor. It's still not a perfect solution. I give up a lot privacy that way, and in order to use Contributor, I have to give up some of the other uBlock features that I really like (in particula…

I like your note at the end and I agree with you. If you are being used for some other form of monetary benefit then ads don't make sense to me.

I would apply this model to, if I pay for TV don't give me ads too. Either raise your costs, provide me with a higher cost version of TV as an alternative or don't run ads. I look at the Tivo as one of the first Ad Block devices out there and there was a REASON it was created, you've already got me paying for this service why are you taking someone else' money too?

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#294

Post by stincity »

manigandham wrote: post #200
stincity wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I respectfully disagree. I don't enjoy ads, I never click on them even if the item is something I'd use at the time, I will not click on it. I'll just go to amazon or whatever and get it there. I will never, ever click on an ad. So I'd rather not even see them.

Clicking on ads isnt necessary. A vast amount of ads are paid on an impression basis and I can guarantee that you've been affected by the advertising you've come across in your life. This is one of the most data-driven industries on the planet and there are petabytes of data generated every day showing how well it works.

That's cool. I never said I wasn't affected. Just that I don't click on them. Ever. Like I said, I'd go to amazon or drive somewhere before I click ANY internet ad. And thus far, I have never clicked on one... willingly.

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#295

Post by st3v3r »

rloc wrote: post #83
thclark wrote: post #36

uBlock Origin it is! Extensions: Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpa... Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin... Opera: https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/ublock/ Microsoft Edge: https://github.com/nikrolls/uBlock-Edge#microsoft-edge

The only thing to do if you haven't already. uBlock is open source and does the job. This all adBlock making money by blocking ads and then showing their own ads is becoming ridiculous and unethical. So what does Adblock stand for now ?

So how should they make money?

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#296

Post by M_Grey »

thesmallestcat wrote: post #282
M_Grey wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My pleasure, I wish you the best of luck with it.

Another user recommended uMatrix as a Ghostery replacement in this thread which I was trying out, and it looks like some Ghostery/uBlock interaction was to blame. My best guess is some Ghostery resource is correctly flagged by uBlock and that the delay I experienced was a request timeout or similar, from Ghostery.

That makes sense, and oddly enough I was just (literally for the first time, 10 minutes ago) looking at switching out Ghostery for uMatrix. Decision made, thanks.

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#297

Post by aninhumer »

yann63 wrote: post #84
agumonkey wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That fits my definition of acceptable. I, we, aren't blind to people's need to make money for the time and effort. But we don't want 50% clickbait video poppin up randomly. Same for battery life, etc etc. No JS. With some fixed not too screamy image smartly positionned, I'd never block ads. I don't get the logic behind these ads. They really think that shouting red stuff at my face will make me spend time and money ?…

> They really think that shouting red stuff at my face will make me spend time and money ? Actually, yes, they do. And it scares me that they may be right. Ads are toxic. Why don't we ban them? I've yet to hear a sensible argument to keep ads.

> Ads are toxic. Why don't we ban them?

Because there's no way to do so that doesn't run into serious issues with Freedom of Speech, in both letter and spirit.

Who decides what's speech and what's an ad?

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#298

Post by mikeash »

blakeyrat wrote: post #216
chii wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you don't have the right to their content... if they allow the public to view their content, they cannot dictate how the content is viewed. There's ways to block people from viewing content if ads are blocked - but a lot of sites don't do that, because they deem the traffic more important.

If you eat a meal at a restaurant, they also cannot dictate that you must tip the waitstaff. But if you don't, you're a jackass.

That's only because it's a nearly universal social convention in places where tipping is expected. We don't tip because the business is set up to expect it, we tip because society expects it. Businesses are set up to expect it because that's the universal social convention, not the other way around.

If suddenly a big social movement arose that condemned tipping, the landscape would shift, restaurants would stop accepting tips and start paying their staff more, and life would go on. It doesn't happen only because people are happy with the status quo.

That's not the case with advertising. There is no social expectation that you must watch ads. Quite the opposite, in fact: virtually everyone avoids ads when they can do so, with some interesting exceptions like movie trailers.

If you set up a business whose viability depends on your customers doing something they don't want to do, with no social convention to back you up, then you're going to have a bad time. And that's your fault, not your customers'.

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#299

Post by stincity »

pc86 wrote: post #43
cyborgx7 wrote: post #39

No such thing as an acceptable ad.

Then pay for content. Ads are how people who provide free content make money. Yes, they are often offensive (visually, not necessarily the content), slow to load, and contain or utilize some of tracker or retargeting mechanism. But if you can remove those and you basically just have a PNG telling you about a product or service, that is the very definition of acceptable. But to freely consume content from someone (whe…

I blanket block every ad (or whatever the list currently has). If a site has ads, I'll manually block those too. I'll go into their code and find their ad service url and add it into my list. I'll do whatever it takes to remove them, regardless if its simple or not. I do not want to see them and I will continue to visit those sites. I just wish a good adblocker would come to mobile because I'd use it there as well.

Re: Adblock Plus now sells ads

#300

Post by cpeterso »

hackernews2000 wrote: post #291
KORraN wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, uBlock Origin comes from original author of uBlock. Some time ago he said that he doesn't have time to develop Origin and passed project to other guy. Unfortunately, that guy didn't make any big changes in code (except adding himself as an author) and asked for donations. After quite big drama, original author came back, but he wasn't able to get back his project so he called it uBlock Origin.

It's worth noting that it all started on APRIL FOOL'S DAY (2015). That was the convenient day the author of the project decided to say in the comments for a random Github commit "hey, anybody wants to take this over? I'm out", without any previous discussion or announcement. Users assumed it was a joke but it was for real. Literally the first person to reply took over the entire project, and when the developer who wa…

The uBlock Origin name just adds to the confusion. The original developer (gorhill) should create a totally new project name. Word would spread that uBlock was the old thing and no longer maintained and that gorhill's new project was the future.

Even using a name like "uBlock Next Generation", which is less ambiguous than "uBlock Origin" and suggests "this is the new project", would still cause confusion. People unfamiliar with the project history would just call it "uBlock", leading to the same donation problems.

Post reply on HN