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

921–930 of 962 posts

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#921

Post by godelski »

ako wrote: post #832
mopenstein wrote: post #780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

  > True capitalism can never exist
To nitpick, you mean "unfettered capitalism". As in no government involvement. Which has the identical problem to unfettered anarchy: coalitions form, creating governments. Since many markets have network effects (e.g. bulk purchasing gives lower price per unit) a monopoly tends to be one of the possible steady state solutions. But any monopoly can choose to become a governor of their market, being able to impose regulation even through means other than government (e.g. pull resources, poach, lawsuits, or even decide to operate at a loss until the competition is dead (i.e. "Silicon Valley Strategy").

I just mention this because it's not a problem exactly limited to capitalism. It's a problem that exists in many forms of government and economics (like socialism). It just relies on asymmetric power

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#922

Post by RevEng »

bborud wrote: post #591

I remember back in the day, one of the big selling points for Google’s search engine used to be that the advertising didn’t get in the way. Imagine that.

The big reason for me was that it "just worked". Altavista was the biggest player at the time but you had to learn a while query language to get good results. Google's search engine took plain English keywords and have relevant results.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#923

Post by RevEng »

alex1138 wrote: post #296

1) A lot of ads are terribly overdone and even sometimes actively malicious (malware or tracking). It makes no sense to aggressively try to stamp it out like Google is doing 2) Aside from the Page/Brin stealing tech salaries thing (yeah it really did happen) what happened to Google? They've always been a bit incompetent but their behavior (ie Chrome and increasing censorship on Google/Youtube the last few years) has…

Idealism does with capitalism. Executives and shareholders don't care about ideals: they want money. All of the questionable things Google has done have been in pursuit of ever larger profits.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#924

Post by RevEng »

Beijinger wrote: post #75

I did not even realize my ublock origin was turned off. My HOST FILE script did the same service: https://expatcircle.com/cms/privacy-advanced-ublock-origin-w... More concerning is that social fixer was turned off: https://socialfixer.com/ MFGA Make Facebook Great again ;-)

Hosts alone won't solve many ads. Plenty of companies include their own annoying content from their own domains. uBlock lets you get far more fine grained, blocking specific paths.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#925

Post by korse »

I keep hearing that no-one gives a shit about Firefox but I've used it since I was a kid in the mid-2000's (including on mobile) and never had an issue.

The one exception is that I do allot of reading/web surfing using lynx with a couple of flags set but aside from this, I've never seen the need for other browsers.

Why is Firefox 'dead' and why does anyone care what Apple/Google does with their proprietary bullshit?

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#926

Post by strbean »

charcircuit wrote: post #723
maxloh wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recalled it correctly, Chrome's developers imposed a stricter limit on dynamically loaded (fetched) DNR rules. That's why updating rules with the store is the more conventional method.

Chrome allows for 300,000 static rules, 30,000 dynamic rules, and 5,000 session rules. While not 1 to 1, for reference, EasyList has a little over 30,000 rules.

Countdown to every ad provider registering 300,001 new domains...

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#927

Post by asadotzler »

crazygringo wrote: post #777
stavros wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your argument is that if an extension could block even a single ad with MV3, it means that ad blockers function properly in MV3? Do you not agree that "properly" means "having all the functionality they had with MV2"?

> Do you not agree that "properly" means "having all the functionality they had with MV2"? Of course it doesn't, if MV2 provided a bunch of edge case stuff that doesn't matter for normal adblocking. > So your argument is that if an extension could block even a single ad with MV3 That's a silly thing to say. No, it's that if it's blocking 99.9+% of ads it should definitely be considered to be functioning properly. Whi…

You're making up numbers as bad as the person's you're responding to. My made up numbers are more like 98% for uBlock Origin and 95% for Lite, and Origin is maintaining that number while Lite is losing about a point ever couple of months. My expectation is that in a few years, Lite will be not only deficient, but entirely failing to meet expectations of the full version users. For me, it's already getting close.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#928

Post by asadotzler »

esskay wrote: post #732
barryvan wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or Firefox, which isn't just a reskinned Chrome...

If you think Braves just 'reskinned chrome' you've clearly not used it.

Edge maintains more not-Chromium code on its Chromium browser than Brave does on its Chromium browser and both further encourage websites and users to strengthen Google's web monopoly.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#929

Post by asadotzler »

esskay wrote: post #731
moffkalast wrote: post #654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes Brave trustworthy enough for us to run our entire life through it? For me it's irreparably forever tainted by crypto grifting.

The 'crypto grifting' is something you can turn off completely, it's there as a way to make the browser sustainable without accepting payments from Google to make it the default search engine. I'd argue its far more trustworthy than modern day Firefox/Mozilla, they're not exactly the second coming these days. What makes Firefox more trustworthy?

"You can turn off the evil feature that evil people added" isn't really an argument that's gonna convince me that evil people are trustworthy.

Tell me I can turn off the evil intent, and not just one of its manifestations, and we're in business. But you can't tell me that.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#930

Post by asadotzler »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #203
Etheryte wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the browsers you could be using, giving your data away to sketchy crypto bros should really not be at the top of the list.

I really don't care about crypto stuff. If you do, I can understand why that's a dealbreaker for you. But for me, it doesn't matter at all. I just turn the crypto features off and continue on my way.

It's not about the feature. It's about the people who built the feature. "Sure they sold a car that blows up at 75 mph, but I never drive over 60 so I trust them."
Post reply on HN