Adblock Plus now sells ads

Post by nercht12 » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 11:03 PM UTC

cpeterso wrote: post #300

hackernews2000 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Word would spread that uBlock was the old thing and no longer maintained and that gorhill's new project was the future.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 unfa…

Post by M_Grey » Tue, Sep 13, 2016, 11:36 PM UTC

thesmallestcat wrote: post #349

gorhill wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it would be cool if uBlock reported when a call from another extension has been blocked That is the purpose of the built-in logger[1]. By default uBO is not setup to block other extensions' network requests, or those made by the browser itself, one has to configure it explicitly for this to happen[2]. 1. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/The-logger 2. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Behind-the-scene-net…

Hm OK, must be something else then. Either way, uMatrix blows Ghostery away so this has been fortuitous.

Post by dredmorbius » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 1:21 AM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #266

JulianMorrison wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a conflict of values between users and the devs. - Users want ads to just go away, period, the end. - The devs want ads to be nice . So they swat down the nasty ones and permit the nice ones. Ransomware was probably the wrong way to do that, but I can see why it was superficially appealing. "We check your ads for niceness, and then permit them. We won't give our effort away for free", being the idea behind it…

I don't want ads to go away. I want ads that are relevant, or at least aren't insultingly stupid. The utter shit people run on major sites these days is so patently offensive ("Single Mom's Weight Loss Trick!", "Get Government Money Tomorrow!") that I keep a blocker on for my own sanity. I'm consistently appalled at the extremely low quality advertising that supposedly reputable properties put on their sites. Give me…

Post by fdgdasfadsf » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:10 AM UTC

stincity wrote: post #299

pc86 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Post by majewsky » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 11:41 AM UTC

morgante wrote: post #228

newscracker wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ads on sites like Google and Facebook are perfectly fine by me—I just don't want big, animated ads or (more frequently) broken ones which prevent me from reading content. Honest question - don't the sidebar ads (on the right) on Facebook look ugly and intrusive to you (more so since they also change often)? Apart from Facebook tracking, I block ads on Facebook because of these too.

> Honest question - don't the sidebar ads (on the right) on Facebook look ugly and intrusive to you (more so since they also change often)? Not at all. I honestly don't even understand how you could think they are. They're literally just a (static) image and a few lines of text. Heck, I often even find Facebook ads to be inherently valuable. Most of them are for services I use and like.