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

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

0x44.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 962 posts

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#831

Post by GoblinSlayer »

brookst wrote: post #771
pyrale wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no, instead consumers pick products because of advertising. What an improvement.

Being prescriptive about human nature will always be frustrating. You and I can argue about what consumers “should” do but the reality is they will always pick the highest perceived benefit at the lowest perceived cost, even if deeper technical knowledge or improved ideological perspective would change those choices.

They have nothing to pick, google already picked chrome for them.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#832

Post by ako »

mopenstein wrote: post #780
nozzlegear wrote: post #774

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you’re wrong about Safari itself being the reason chrome isn’t a 90%+ market owner; rather, it’s apple’s requirement that no other browser engine can exist on iOS. It sounds like capitalism has so far saved us from a Chrome monopoly, then.

Capitalism doesn't exist. The fact that trademark, copyright, and patents exist nullify capitalism. There can be no free market if your government intervenes in every transaction.

True capitalism can never exist due to lack of transparency, urgency, monopolies, etc. The best we can have is government controlled capitalism.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#833

Post by jacquesm »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #803
jacquesm wrote: post #585

An adblocker is a firewall for your brain. Google should have no say over what I consume and when and with for instance youtube being pretty much unavoidable their monopoly position is abused by forcing you to pay for it. Doubly so because of the bait-and-switch, I'm fine with platforms that start off being ad supported, I'm not fine with platforms that become huge on piracy that are free to use by everybody and not…

Switching costs for consumers are pretty low. Though I'd agree that for producers, it is hard to compete anywhere else.

That's not really true. Youtube is the de-facto means through which a lot of companies and even governments communicate important information to the general public. It took the place of a lot of public broadcasting and documents supplied in paper form. This is highly annoying but hardly a choice on the part of the recipients.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#834

Post by janalsncm »

userbinator wrote: post #331
janalsncm wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Sorry, we don’t support any browsers other than Chrome” I agree exploiting a bug isn’t a sustainable solution. But it’s also unrealistic to think switching is viable.

Find who is responsible for such sites and send them strongly-worded emails. If it's a commerce site, tell them they just lost a potential customer. In my experience it's usually the trendchasing web developers who have drunk the Goog-Aid and are trying to convince the others in the organisation to use "modern" (read: controlled by Google) features and waste time implementing these changes --- instead of the "depreca…

This is common on internal company websites. Devs only support chrome officially.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#836

Post by burnte »

rustcleaner wrote: post #348
burnte wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

>Brendan Eich's hateful hands LOL California Proposition 8 was pretty mainstream opinion back then. Maybe stop with the ex post facto persecution?

I have a closer knowledge that you think, having been inside Mozilla for a long time. He's not a bad human, but he's blinded by religion. Separately, slavery was mainstream, it was still hateful and wrong. Prop 8 was pure hate propaganda.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#837

Post by burnte »

djrj477dhsnv wrote: post #395
acdha wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hate can be popular but that still doesn’t make it right. He knew that he was spending money hoping to take away rights from people he knew, to tell some of them that their marriages shouldn’t be allowed, and did it anyway. That’s hateful regardless of how many other people joined him.

By that definition, all politics is "hate". Passing a law will always take away the rights of a group in some way or other, and politics is the debate of whether or not that's a good or bad thing. Personally I'm 100% for letting everyone express their gender or sexual identities. But I'm not going to demonize someone for having a different opinion and making a small donation to support their political views.

> By that definition, all politics is "hate". Passing a law will always take away the rights of a group in some way or other, and politics is the debate of whether or not that's a good or bad thing.

Most politics isn't targeted at taking away rights from people, so most politics is not hateful.

Please don't haul over a straw man like "what about murderers and pedophiles, don't they get rights?" No, no one gets rights to hurt other people.

> But I'm not going to demonize someone for having a different opinion and making a small donation to support their political views.

I'm not demonizing him, I'm refusing to do do business with him while he thinks it's ok to fund organizations and policies that hurt people and take away rights. Maybe you should too, lest someone start to take away YOUR rights, but maybe just do it because it's not right to take away anyone's rights.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#838

Post by pixxel »

crazygringo wrote: post #94
rstat1 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its called Lite because it has tons of missing functionality from the not-Lite version that make the not-Lite version more effective as a content blocker.

It's not "tons of missing functionality". It still blocks all the ads in practice. Maybe it's less effective in some theoretical case, but not anything I've seen. People talk as if it's only blocking 10% of the ads it used to, when the reality seems to be 99.999% or something. And it's faster now. And they removed stuff like the element zapper but that has nothing to do with Manifest v3. It's because they literally w…

[dead]

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#839

Post by godelski »

al_borland wrote: post #66

Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.

  > ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers).
People should do this for many reasons. Monopolies are not good for anyone, including Google[0].

For most people, that means installing Firefox or using Safari. There are others, but the space is small. Don't listen to people, Firefox is perfectly good and most people wont see major differences.

Truth is we like to complain. It's good to push things forward and find issues that need to be fixed, not nothing is perfect. For every complaint about Firefox there's another for Chrome. You can't just switch to Brave, Edge, Opera or some other color of Chrome. Things will feel different, but really it's easy to make mountains out of molehills. So what do you care more about?

[0] short term, yes. Long term no. Classic monopoly gets lazy and rests upon its laurels

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#840

Post by Xss3 »

0points wrote: post #527
chii wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> use Linux except that for a majority of users, windows is where their applications are at - such as gaming, word processing, or some other thing. Sure there are replacements (somewhat) for each of those categories, but they are not direct replacements, and require a cost of some kind (retraining, or a substitute quality). This is esp. true for gaming, and it's only recent that gaming has made some inroads via the s…

> except that for a majority of users, windows is where their applications are at - such as gaming, word processing, or some other thing. Until you switch to linux you won't understand how inferior your windows setup always was. It's hard for us to tell you what you are missing out on, you simply need to experience it. I mostly game in a Windows 10 VM running on my Linux desktop computer. Single keypress to switch to…

Many popular games have anticheats that prevent vm use.
Post reply on HN