Adblockers stop publishers serving ads to (or even seeing) 1bn web users - Press Gazette
-
There was a time in the 90's where ads were mostly banners, and that was fine; google's text-only ads were completely acceptable.
But that didn't last long - it went downhill with the proliferation of popups, especially the nefarious kind which created even more popups or tried to stop the user from closing them, and usage of dialog boxes.
And whoever was the first person to add sound to an ad, i wish you and your entire family tree that your genitalia translocate to your forehead.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Ads in the 90's and 00's would just layer toolbars onto your browser. Is still have a a nervous twitch when I see a thick toolbars or animated cursors.
-
My kid hasn't ever seen an ad on any streaming service or any web page, ever. And I block ads via DNS. We don't have any kind of live TV service or cable so they literally have just never seen any ads, ever.
Sometimes if we're out at a restaurant, some TV is playing live content and an ad runs. My kid is shocked like it's the first time he ever ate sugar.
Glad I can keep that toxic trash out of my house and out of his life.
Unrelated, but this just brought back memories from long ago when I was a kid and used to watch the advertising channels on purpose. Endless stream of useless gym equipment and weird kitchen tools; they painted such a bizarre and surreal world full of repetition, forced plastic smiles and all sorts of almost otherwordly things that had nothing to do with reality. It was fascinating, almost like watching something of the fae folk
-
Exactly, adblockers don't block a static <div> on the page with some text, an image and a link. It's only the user-tracking, obtrusive ad-networks they block. Every old-school form of advertising didn't track users and did just fine. Even today, billboards are priced based on the amount of traffic on the highway, not based on checking inside each car and building a profile on each driver (though I wouldn't put it past them trying to figure out how to do that soonish).
God, I can just see the wet dreams of an advertising exec now. If an australian bloke can replicate million dollar systems with $100, the advertising companies can surely wank out the money for license plate readers a quarter mile ahead of their billboard with good identification. The new electronic billboards already switch what ad they're showing every half minute or so now, and I bet they could do what ze big boiz do with the auctioning of ads.
I think right now most of the US doesn't allow random API access to license plate and registration data, but I really have no idea... How much do you think companies would
bribepay for some laws to be changed about that? -
the AIs will just start their own circle jerks
While we talk about the Old Net beyond the Blackwall with our chooms.
-
The trade body called it “illegal circumvention technology”
Lol. Fuck off.
Lol they will even say blocking phishing links are unethical
-
Do you have some evidence of this?
Okay, I'm assuming that you are asking for evidence of the paying of adblockers to allow some ads through, and not for evidence that he fixed the typo he thought you were actually posting about?
Do a quick search for why we all now use ublock origin rather than ublock plus, and then for why we were using ublock plus rather than ublock, and then for why we were using ublock instead of adblock. There might be some adblock plus in the middle of that somewhere as well.
-
Unless I’m misunderstanding, that doesn’t sound like a bug at all. Outside of a few specific circumstances, devices shouldn’t communicate with anything outside of the given subnet mask. Rejecting traffic outside of that subnet mask is exactly what it should do. And why wouldn’t your pihole be in the same subnet (or at least be included in the subnet mask) for the LAN? You can have the pihole’s IP address be whatever you want, so give it an IP in the same subnet.
I use VLANs and different subnets for security. Having PiHole break randomly every few weeks and seeing the config is different when I didn’t change it was beyond frustrating, so I just gave up
-
"Son, are those ads in my house!?"
dad, please, it's only a little marketing!
"NO SON OF MINE! GET MY BELT!"
dad, no!
"What's our DNS address!?"
dad, I don't kno-
"Count the licks, boy! I'll teach you the hard way!"
Jesus. How are you going to get to 8.8.8.8 belt licks?
(and please, for the love of god, don't use 8.8.8.8!)
-
I don’t know if anyone reading this will ever have this problem (if you got this far without installing an adblocker, this is your wake up call - go get one now), but ctrl+W is the shortcut to kill a tab and that should work regardless site focus or popups
Unless the lovely javascript detects that you're trying to close the tab and hijacks that to ask you if you are sure you want to
forcefully tell them to fuck off and dieleave the page. It's only one extra click, sure, but I remember some from the old days that wouldn't let you close shit. Ugh, thank god for better modern standards and adblockers. -
Don’t date stupid people. Incentivize intelligence.
I know surgeons who can’t start a zoom call. Being uneducated in a particular area is not stupidity. If you avoid dating someone over their lack of adtech knowledge, I would assume they are the one that dodged a bullet.
-
They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.
Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.
This is easily solved by not using 3rd parties and tracking data for ads. If the ad was just part of the page (similar to an ad in the newspaper) then ad blockers would not be able to detect them at all. A YouTuber saying "before we get started, this video is sponsored by [relevant related company]" does not get blocked by ad blockers.
However, in order to do that websites would be responsible for the ads they display. If they don't do their due diligence they won't be able to pass it off as "we're not responsible for it, it's our ad company that put it there." They don't want to be responsible for the ads they show, but they want you to be responsible for the ads you don't watch.
-
Ads used to be static text in the sidebar that the site owner manually put there. They didn't have any tracking and didn't slow down the loading time. Once they started adding images, I started using an ad blocker. I was stuck on dial-up until 2008 and a single, small image could add 10 or more seconds to the page loading time.
I was even okay with images. It’s when the images started moving, making it difficult and distracting to read text that I realized if they are willing to sacrifice the core purpose of the page for ads, it’s only going to get worse.
Remember the target that would move back and forth really quickly to try to get you to click it?
-
They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.
Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.
Let me know when you can't inject malware via ads....
-
Fair warning, using third-party DNS is a massive security issue; It basically allows that DNS provider to see all of the sites you’re visiting. Whenever possible, you should use a self-hosted DNS server like pi-hole.
Thats true, i just didnt want to setup the reverse proxying for that. Also, its DoH ao my isp doesnt get my dns.
-
Name and shame. Who's the link aggregator?
It’s happened directly on Google before. Advertisers aren’t vetted except in specific industries. It could happen on any site, trusted or not.
-
God, I can just see the wet dreams of an advertising exec now. If an australian bloke can replicate million dollar systems with $100, the advertising companies can surely wank out the money for license plate readers a quarter mile ahead of their billboard with good identification. The new electronic billboards already switch what ad they're showing every half minute or so now, and I bet they could do what ze big boiz do with the auctioning of ads.
I think right now most of the US doesn't allow random API access to license plate and registration data, but I really have no idea... How much do you think companies would
bribepay for some laws to be changed about that?Sure, the gov may not allow random API access to license plate registration data, but who knows how many license plates and associated identity are somehow scooped up by some data broker somewhere? You know those parking lots that require an app where you pay parking by entering your licence plate, then logging in with Google/Apple ID, and paying with a credit card? Fuuuuu
-
They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.
Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Maybe if they didn’t use very intrusive ads people would not install ad-blockers so much
Many websites put a video playing in later in top of the text, with another layer of ads and tiny space to read… the website would be unreadable without ad-blocks
-
“And Scott Messer, founder of publishing adtech consultancy Messer Media, added: “Dark traffic is unlike anything we have seen before. It’s demonetising publisher content at scale without user consent.
“Publishers already face an existential-level threat in the face of AI reducing referral traffic. This is another slice that publishers cannot afford to lose.””
The quote is even worse when you take this snippet from above:
The study discovered that the majority of users did not choose to block ads, with ad-blocking technology often activated by a third-party like their employer at a network level, their educational institution, security software they installed, or public Wi-Fi networks. For example ad-blocking tech can be bundled with VPNs (virtual private networks that hide a web user’s location) and built into browsers like BRave and Duck Duck Go. There are also dedicated apps and cross-platform brands such as AdGuard which describes itself as “the world’s most advanced ad blocker” that can “even” block on Youtube.
So they are trying to frame corporate security policies as "no consent". Which totally does not make sense as the contract the worker signed is consent for corporate IT to manage the computer and also to secure it against malware serves via ads. And to even suggest that users who are using a VPN with built in adblock or an alternative browser do not want to use the features the software they installed come with, is crap
-
Maybe if they didn’t use very intrusive ads people would not install ad-blockers so much
Many websites put a video playing in later in top of the text, with another layer of ads and tiny space to read… the website would be unreadable without ad-blocks
@DarkSideOfTheMoon @1984 and all this additional JavaScript and Elements and makes the side's just horrible slow. Compare this with CSS+HTML only sides omg how good they can feel ... I also prefer nowadays text mode browsers again, cause a good readable font + focus on what is important ... the content itself. I really get pissed if websites with public content can't be run anymore without javascript (wtf is up with you guys ?) ....
-
The tech community is pacified into not taking action against the polluters by our adblockers because we don't see the egregious ads and so we don't fight the good fight for the user.
Ad blockers are the fight. Those users who can't be bothered to learn a bit about the devices they spend so much time on aren't owed anything.
What does "fighting the good fight" even look like to you in this context, anyways?
