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

FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

ic3.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 238 posts

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#61

Post by azinman2 »

gerdesj wrote: post #57
azinman2 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The changes Apple made were to increase privacy. Content blockers that have access to the page have no network access. A separate process that does can only update the blocking rules. I quite like Ka-block

"The changes Apple made were to increase privacy" Apple gobbles personal data too and processes it and sells it etc. They are simply rather better at looking ... friendly. They really are very good at that.

Where is Apple tracking your usage across the web? This data is sold to who? These are big claims.

Disclosure: I work at Apple, and have seen zero evidence of anything but trying to make things continuously more secure and private. This in fact makes my job (machine learning) much harder because I don’t have user datasets to leverage.

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#62

Post by jampekka »

> Most internet browsers allow a user to add extensions, including extensions that block advertisements.

This may be sadly outdated. Android Chrome and iOS Webkit probably account for majority of traffic nowadays, and neither allows adblock extensions.

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#64

Post by asib »

shkkmo wrote: post #58
mrinfinitiesx wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just go to ublock origin on firefox and install it, they'll never ask about it; i'm just doing them a solid.

Given the numbers of times I've had to disable ad blocker to fix some janky page I have to use, I don't think installing an ad blocker without explaining or even mentioning it is a friendly act.

Absolutely agree. I often disable my ad blocker/cookie blocker when I'm about to make a big purchase (e.g. airline tickets) in case they interrupt whatever crazy redirect flow the airline and their payment processor have.

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#66

Post by caseyy »

hollerith wrote: post #60
dopadelic wrote: post #56

Adblock would break most websites nowadays. It's commonplace to detect adblock and disable the website if adblock is detected.

Yeah, better not to install any kind of adblock even as a test. No one else does. You would be alone. Also, people who use adblock are antisocial. Also, I'd be mortified if I visited a web page, then the site told me that I cannot continue because I have adblock installed. I wouldn't want that to happen to me even once.

[flagged]

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#68

Post by dylan604 »

vunderba wrote: post #48
dylan604 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also be aware that Google continues to add restrictions to extension permissions such that uBlock Origin may not be as effective as it once was. That's fine. I don't use a Google made browser, so this would not affect me at all. It would also be very easy for this to not affect you too if you just had the courage to stop being a sheeple

I'm not sure who this comment is directed at and I can't speak for everyone but I do think some people have to use Chrome as a requirement from their jobs - such as UI/UX testing for frontend development. So for them, it's better than nothing.

you can use what ever browser for UI/UX testing purposes, but it doesn't have to be your daily driver.

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#69

Post by hollerith »

caseyy wrote: post #66
hollerith wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, better not to install any kind of adblock even as a test. No one else does. You would be alone. Also, people who use adblock are antisocial. Also, I'd be mortified if I visited a web page, then the site told me that I cannot continue because I have adblock installed. I wouldn't want that to happen to me even once.

[flagged]

In addition to the threat to children, there's also terrorism to consider. It is frightening to consider that the World Trade Center towers might still be standing were it not for ordinary users who foolishly assumed that nothing really bad could happen if they installed adblock.

Re: FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)

#70

Post by hootz »

purple-leafy wrote: post #13

I make loads of browser extensions, is there any wins that can be had by building another ad-blocker? An manifest v3 compliant one. Or does unlock origin lite cover everything? I was thinking continent specific ad blockers etc

All work is pretty much already done by uBlock Origin Lite and AdGuard MV3.

Manifest v3 fucking sucks, and people will probably need to go to system-wide ad blocking such as AdGuard to block ads using all the filters, as v3 limits the number of filters you can use.

Post reply on HN