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

YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

ghacks.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 100 posts

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#71

Post by inferiorhuman »

sanswork wrote: post #60
inferiorhuman wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A service that's easily defeated by automation and thus mostly devoid of value outside of training Google's AI products. I think the technical term is "false sense of security".

I use it on a number of my forms and it works fantastically on almost all cases since most bad actors are lazy.

Sorry, I should've just left it at trivially defeated. My preferred method is to just use a different browser and/or clear my cookies. Meanwhile I spent around 30 seconds on DDG and came up with 5 chrome store captcha solvers, 2 github projects, and 1 paid captcha solving service.

False. Sense. Of. Security.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#72

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

roscas wrote: post #14

"About 11% of YouTube users openly say they use ad blockers. Some communities report 40-60% of viewers use ad blockers. Overall global ad blocker usage is around 42.7% for all internet users." So, almost half of people online use adblockers. I know some use adblockers that have white lists. Everyone should use uBlock Origin as it does not have white lists to allow "some" ads and it is the best adblocker and protectio…

Sounds didactic

What about uMatrix; some might argue it is even better than uBlock Origin, at least one can use both at the same time; if "security issues" are a concern, the so-called "modern" browser is a gigantic target that sources and runs Javascript from the internet automatically; there is also the choice of not using one (hence no need for uBlock or other extensions); Javascript isn't required for downloading or watching YouTube videos but YouTube of course wants everyone to use their "Javascript player" so they can monitor people's behaviour at the computer with telemetry and other unsolicited connections

"A company that depends on ads, lives by using you."

Ad services. The company acts as an intermediary (middleman), sitting between two parties, e.g., a video producer and a video consumer, conducting surveillance, collecting data, serving ads, relying on other people to produce and upload video, for free, then targeting the people consuming it with ads; parasitic

Mozilla is the company's business partner, sending data about www users to the company

As such, their software seems compromised; they continually promote an "internet advertising ecocsystem"

There are other ways to avoid ads that do not require a so-called "modern" browser that runs Javascript; usually the so-called "modern" browser are distributed by the company and its partners or competitors; optimised for serving ads

In fact, usually internet ads rely on Javascript, so the "ad blocker" solution is using Javascript to counter Javascript

Some users might prefer to just not choose the so-called "modern" browser as their client, and not run Javascript

Also, not sure whether it is still true but Pi-Hole used to suggest the company's DNS service as "upstream", provide it as a choice, maybe even set it as a default

Nothing hands the company more control than using its public DNS service; the company's DNS cache is filled with IP addresses of tracking and ad servers; users will actually pay third parties like NextDNS to filter these addresses out while the company's hardware products hardcode their public DNS service into the products to allow phoning home to the mothership and free flow of telemetry, tracking and advertising

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#73

Post by pabs3 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #72
roscas wrote: post #14

"About 11% of YouTube users openly say they use ad blockers. Some communities report 40-60% of viewers use ad blockers. Overall global ad blocker usage is around 42.7% for all internet users." So, almost half of people online use adblockers. I know some use adblockers that have white lists. Everyone should use uBlock Origin as it does not have white lists to allow "some" ads and it is the best adblocker and protectio…

Sounds didactic What about uMatrix; some might argue it is even better than uBlock Origin, at least one can use both at the same time; if "security issues" are a concern, the so-called "modern" browser is a gigantic target that sources and runs Javascript from the internet automatically; there is also the choice of not using one (hence no need for uBlock or other extensions); Javascript isn't required for downloading…

BTW uMatrix isn't maintained and has had security issues before, so it might not be the best choice.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#74

Post by toastercat »

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 freeloaders resisting the ads then services won't host the content, and on the path to that the freeloaders are really just leeching off a system in an entitled way (unless their goal is to destroy the services they use in which case good on them for consistency and for picking a worthy target).

If people aren't going to be polite and accept that contract then fine, enforcement was always by an honour system. But strategically if a service's social contract doesn't work for someone then they shouldn't use that service - they'd just be feeding the beast. They should go make their own service work or investigate the long list of alternative platforms.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#75

Post by sanswork »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #71
sanswork wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use it on a number of my forms and it works fantastically on almost all cases since most bad actors are lazy.

Sorry, I should've just left it at trivially defeated. My preferred method is to just use a different browser and/or clear my cookies. Meanwhile I spent around 30 seconds on DDG and came up with 5 chrome store captcha solvers, 2 github projects, and 1 paid captcha solving service. False. Sense. Of. Security.

Perfect is the enemy of good. See we can all do that. I don't need a captcha to be perfect, I need to it be good enough.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#76

Post by scotty79 »

sanswork wrote: post #32
scotty79 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same reason they shouldn't be able to pay with gambling, scamming, prostitution or their organs. Advertisement industry is all a scam. It's a privately levied tax that lets sellers win competition with themselves and ultimately the customer pays, both in price of products and in their attention as well.

Without advertising how does anyone get visibility into new products? You are proposing winner take all markets when you propose banning advertising.

Single, public, online product and service database provided by the market regulator. Since the country gets income from taxing commerce it's only fair that they also provide discovery service. If you want to sell something on the market you have to enter it into this database, with the up to date price and relevant documentation.

Consumers can access the database through provided UI or through 3rd party tools using this database API.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#77

Post by inferiorhuman »

sanswork wrote: post #75
inferiorhuman wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I should've just left it at trivially defeated. My preferred method is to just use a different browser and/or clear my cookies. Meanwhile I spent around 30 seconds on DDG and came up with 5 chrome store captcha solvers, 2 github projects, and 1 paid captcha solving service. False. Sense. Of. Security.

Perfect is the enemy of good. See we can all do that. I don't need a captcha to be perfect, I need to it be good enough.

Right, it's not even good at anything save for using my CPU and my time to train Google's AI products. As a human if I get blocked (a.k.a. it refuses to acknowledge anything I've "solved" correctly) I can clear my cookies and bypass the block. Whatever benefit you think you're getting, you're not.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#78

Post by sanswork »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #77
sanswork wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perfect is the enemy of good. See we can all do that. I don't need a captcha to be perfect, I need to it be good enough.

Right, it's not even good at anything save for using my CPU and my time to train Google's AI products. As a human if I get blocked (a.k.a. it refuses to acknowledge anything I've "solved" correctly) I can clear my cookies and bypass the block. Whatever benefit you think you're getting, you're not.

The benefit I'm getting is it stop almost all bots from submitting forms on my websites. It works basically flawlessly for that. I'm guessing you either don't run any websites with traffic or have never tried it if you think its worthless. I'm sure there are ways to bypass them but no one I care about has bothered so it doesn't matter. The lock on my front door doesn't have to stop a professional lock picker to be useful. The captcha on my website doesn't have to stop someone trying to get around it for it to be useful at stopping almost all the bots that don't even bother trying.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#79

Post by inferiorhuman »

sanswork wrote: post #78
inferiorhuman wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, it's not even good at anything save for using my CPU and my time to train Google's AI products. As a human if I get blocked (a.k.a. it refuses to acknowledge anything I've "solved" correctly) I can clear my cookies and bypass the block. Whatever benefit you think you're getting, you're not.

The benefit I'm getting is it stop almost all bots from submitting forms on my websites. It works basically flawlessly for that. I'm guessing you either don't run any websites with traffic or have never tried it if you think its worthless. I'm sure there are ways to bypass them but no one I care about has bothered so it doesn't matter. The lock on my front door doesn't have to stop a professional lock picker to be us…

  The lock on my front door doesn't have to stop a professional lock picker to be useful.
You've taped the key to the door knob. You're not stopping bots or bad actors, and I'll sleep plenty well at night knowing I use an ad blocker.

Re: YouTube steps up fight against ad blockers again

#80

Post by sanswork »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #79
sanswork wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The benefit I'm getting is it stop almost all bots from submitting forms on my websites. It works basically flawlessly for that. I'm guessing you either don't run any websites with traffic or have never tried it if you think its worthless. I'm sure there are ways to bypass them but no one I care about has bothered so it doesn't matter. The lock on my front door doesn't have to stop a professional lock picker to be us…

The lock on my front door doesn't have to stop a professional lock picker to be useful. You've taped the key to the door knob. You're not stopping bots or bad actors, and I'll sleep plenty well at night knowing I use an ad blocker.

I literally am stopping bots though, it isn't hard to see the results or the differences between results into my systems with it on and off. It's weird that you're trying to argue against my actual experience.

Of course you do, you've managed to justify to yourself that your leeching is both giving it to Google and somehow supporting content creators. The internal inconsistency could only possibly lead to a good nights sleep.

Post reply on HN