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

Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 504 posts

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#371

Post by pbhjpbhj »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #316
lucb1e wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bad ads ruin it for Google. That might be why someone proposed it. But your parent comment mentions why management approved of the risky move: > They are trying to put "competing internet ad companies" out of business.

If there is even just a whiff of that, Google will be in very big trouble with competition authorities. So if - and that is a big if - Google goes ahead with this plan, they will have to make absolutely sure that any blocking is based on objective and simple to understand quality criteria.

They can probably avoid the competition issues by creating the ad-blocker but not lining it to an ad list, then providing a "choose an ad-block list" option? The same way MS created the browser-choice screen!?

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#372

Post by on_and_off »

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

I have no share in Google but I have been waiting for such an ad blocker for years :

I don't want to block all ads

I want an ad blocker that protects me from popunder (is there any point to those ?) popups, autoplay videos, ad walls and other shitty ads that make my experience awful.

I don't want an adblocker that blocks everything by default and where I have to manually white list all the sites I consult regularly.

I already spent a while on some really good blogs before realizing that adblock was killing all their ads for no reason.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#373

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Arnt wrote: post #329
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good reason to use a browser not built by an ad company - Firefox or Safari - where there are no conflicts of interest.

Safari. Firefox is overwhelmingly dependent on Yahoo for income, and Yahoo is an ad company.

Firefox have done major browser-chrome changes (unremovable buttons) in order to court financial incentives too. FF is my main browser out of habit but with their recent history I don't trust them not to try and sell out their users [again].

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#374

Post by return0 »

erikb wrote: post #355
return0 wrote: post #341

It's scary to watch how google manipulates the web to make it "google's web". At first they incentivized everyone to offer specific types of content, then they gradually made monetizing more difficult, and now they are actively going to try to remove the competition. They should be working on improving their ad delivery system instead.

It becomes "less" scary if you remember that many people already think that "web" means "Facebook+Instagram app on iPhone".

google is still the most visited site though, and you always end up on the web with it.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#375

Post by slizard »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #162
TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

On mobile Chrome does not support extensions while Firefox does. Recently on acquiring a new phone I used Chrome for a few days -- I had entirely forgotten how terrible the user-experience is without UBlock!

Oh yes, my biggest pain is that Firefox can't replace the webview browser, so I still get tracked and shown ads if I use the Google app or any other app with the in-app webview browser.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#376

Post by coldpie »

CoryG89 wrote: post #180
forgotpwtomain wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On mobile Chrome does not support extensions while Firefox does. Recently on acquiring a new phone I used Chrome for a few days -- I had entirely forgotten how terrible the user-experience is without UBlock!

I always suspected the reason we never got extensions in mobile Chrome is that they didn't want the ad blockers. I wasn't aware that Firefox mobile started supporting them. Going to give it a try.

Firefox for Android is really good. Most passive browsing extensions work just as well on mobile as they do on desktop.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#377

Post by lerpa »

TechRemarker wrote: post #140

At first it sounds insane that Google would do such a thing since while ad blocking is growing, enabling the feature natively especially by default would incredibly increase the number of ads blocked. My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use…

Adds built-in ad blocker, removes competition from Chrome extensions store/site or even blocks installing them altogether though the browser.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#378

Post by coldpie »

Zarel wrote: post #301
Eerie wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adblock Plus is pretty open about it. You can disable the option easily. And Google ads are, in fact, relatively non intrusive. I don't see the problem.

I'm not opposed to an exception for acceptable ads; I think it's a good idea. My only problem is that it seems to be a serious conflict of interest to accept money from ad providers for this.

Reviewing ads takes time. Time is money. It's perfectly reasonable to charge for the review process.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#379

Post by NoGravitas »

Arizhel wrote: post #172
WhitneyLand wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad blocking strikes so deeply at the heart of Google's success, it's simply not credible to believe there is no more to the strategy than the simple defense mentioned in the article. To speculate on just one possible strategy: - First order of business, crush Ad Block plus' pay to play business. Possibly just by entering the market with resources, IP, and channel that would overwhelm them. - Continue on this path unt…

While this is a possibility, the wrench in the works is the Firefox browser. How is Google going to get them to play along and prevent 3rd-party blockers like UBlock Origin from working? I don't see it happening. They can certainly put ABP out of business, which honestly is fine with me. But UO isn't a business AFAIK, it's a Free open-source project. That's like trying to put vim out of business; you just can't, beca…

I'd like to agree with you, but Firefox has already buckled under to support DRM, so I don't know how much you can count on them to be a bulwark against industry pressure.

Re: Google plans ad-blocking feature in Chrome browser

#380

Post by tyingq »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #270
QuinnyPig wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't imagine this wouldn't lead to one hell of an antitrust lawsuit...

They don't have anything near a browser monopoly.

Their market share in display advertising would be the entry point. Or phones...The EU is already persuing antitrust action around Android.
Post reply on HN