Adblock neutered

[Marauder2003]

http://recode.net/2015/06/18/ad-tech-vet-ben-barokas-launches-sourcepoint-to-block-ad-blockers/

[Merc1138]

And if they actually do anything, someone who doesn't want to see their BS will counter it.

I use adblock, I don't have it blocking calguns because the ads aren't intrusive and they're out of the way if I don't want to see them. Unfortunately some sites love those skyscraper ads on the sides of the page, pop-overs that follow as you're scrolling through a page, god damned autoplay garbage, turning random words on pages into links or popups if you accidentally mouse over them, etc. Don't make your ads intrusive, and most people won't care. Unfortunately all it takes is a user getting pissed off at one ridiculous page, installing an ad blocker, and then never white-listing anything else.

[meaty-btz]

On every other medium of content delivery we have the ability to change the channel, mute the commercial, or other similar result.

In many ways, adblockers are the mute-button of internet advertisement. I have no desire for the ads and clutters of ads that plague the web today. What is worse is that MANY of those ads are of a "dubious" nature. A favorite zero-day vector for malware attacks on those zero-day vulnerabilities in web-browsers. Their very nature and means of display are often intrusive and dubious. Needless to say that in a professional IT environment the implementation of company wide adblocker software was more effective at preventing malware intrusions onto computers.

Ads, popups, popunders, and similar things are all linked hand in hand with malware and people have a right to put a stop to something that can "act" of its own accord with the users computer, which is what popups do. Unless the user desires a new window, one should not open, let alone one that has no means of closing, or a video that plays at high volume with no means to mute it.

There is nothing wrong with making money or even advertising in general. The problem arises when advertising becomes aggressive, intrusive, and outright dangerous.

If they cleaned up their acts as an industry people would never have had the big push for adblockers. The push came because of the problems and dangerous natures of web based advertising.

No matter what they come up with someone will counter it again. Data can be filtered and it will be.

In the end I consume how I chose, not how someone else dictates I should. Of all web-advertising Google is the cleanest and it still is overly intrusive. The advent of advertising interrupting video streams was a major push for people to pick up ad blocking software.

This goes even further when consuming on a "metered" connection. Any advertising data is unwanted bandwidth consumption. In fact on many webpages (some big ones like MSNBC) the ads are a large fraction of the page-load. Does the content provider have the right to push thirdparty or even fourth party data use on the viewer? Most of the ads are not small and even result in a slowed pageload as they wait for the third or fourth party server to respond.

Ad sellers on the internet brought this on themselves. They have made an enemy of every webuser and their aggressive fight back will only entrench it and result in even MORE people using ad fighting software. In stead of backing down they have become more aggressive screaming in the faces of the people who they demand make them money. The insanity of their stance is plain.

I run, no-script and various ad blockers and popup blockers. It has kept me virus free for the better part of a decade now. I don't deal with malware infections all the time or adware or other nasty stuff either. Most of which was vectored through WEBADS. Poor butt hurt people feeding off the bottom of the ocean, and they wonder why everyone hates them.

[Merc1138]

A point that should be made about the malware in ads. It's not always some shady porn website that causes it. Legit websites and ad networks have had their ads compromised with everything from bogus ads and keyloggers to ransomware.

[meaty-btz]

A point that should be made about the malware in ads. It's not always some shady porn website that causes it. Legit websites and ad networks have had their ads compromised with everything from bogus ads and keyloggers to ransomware.

Yup, mostly due to the nature of how web advertising is served. It is often a third, fourth, or even FIFTH party thing. That is, the website, the first party, has a deal with the 2nd party to sell ad space. The 2nd party, the company buying ad space then sells the ad-space to another company, the third party, who aggregates the ads, but it is possible that another layer exists between the originating ad server and the website serving it. As such there is ZERO oversight or safety checking on the ad being served to the end user. Google being the only company that deviates from this pattern. Since the normal pattern serves the ads often from another country all kinds of "fun" can ensue.

[SMR510]

Internet companies need to take notice and stop subsidizing their businesses to only rely on ad sales.

For example, I would happily pay a few dollars a month for YouTube access without ads. I'm sorry but watching a 30 second ad to watch a 2 minute video is a waste of my time. This practice is not sustainable.

[pc_load_letter]

Internet companies need to take notice and stop subsidizing their businesses to only rely on ad sales.

For example, I would happily pay a few dollars a month for YouTube access without ads. I'm sorry but watching a 30 second ad to watch a 2 minute video is a waste of my time. This practice is not sustainable.

Sadly, you are one of the few. Most people want free and don't give a damn about the content producers.

While i agree i wouldn't mind paying for some content, I don't mind "sponsors" ads on podcasts like twit.tv etc.

[antiseen]

I loathe Internet advertising because it is always obtrusive. To the point where the ads load up first on every page while everything else crawls.

I had enough of the youtube ads. If any of you have rooted phones or tablets, install xposed installer and youtube adaway. Knocks them out permanently and completely.

Every time I forget and watch a youtube video on my phone, I sigh and go grab my tablet. That's how much I hate ads. I'll waste more time grabbing my tablet and searching for the video again vs sit through a 30 sec ad.

I also think this is the last locked down android phone I'm buying. Nexus and root from here forward.

[bohoki]

they already have adblock sensors that ask you to turn off adblock but those sites can go to heck

[meaty-btz]

if advertisers want "viewers" then a new model would be a good suggestion.
Pay the VIEWER.

Most people wouldn't mind choice based consumption when they are PAID to consume it.

The model of content provider being paid to shove ads down their content consumer's is.. well offensive and abusive. Mostly the content being consumed is casual in nature and being choked on the ads the way they are served is unequal.

Now if you want me to view your ad, PAY ME and allow me to decide NOT to view your crappy flashy noisy ad.

It would be honestly more effective as everyone wants some spare bucks and people are SUCKERS for chump change.

Kind of like I was getting paid to the the annual TV Survey. Came with 2 bucks in cash in the mail. 2 bucks is 2 bucks more than I had before.

Choice based advertising consumption would muscle out all those "crapware" ad folks.

As for my level of ad hate, I don't watch TV. If there is ANYTHING I want to watch I consume it in an ad-free medium.

[SMR510]

Sadly, you are one of the few. Most people want free and don't give a damn about the content producers.

While i agree i wouldn't mind paying for some content, I don't mind "sponsors" ads on podcasts like twit.tv etc.

Well that is why ads on sites like youtube are so annoying. They aren't selected/brokered through the content creator and most of the time have no relation to their content. In fact, now content creators are no longer allowed to have their own ads within their content, likely because people paying to advertise on youtube were paying more vs. going direct to creators and obviously were upset about it.

I watch a lot of LinusTechTips, I don't mind their little sponsor spots where they basically give a shout out to their sponsor for the video. It is related and going directly into their pocket. Now they are on Vessel and I have been trying it for the last few weeks on their free 30 day trial but after that it is something like $4 per month. Unfortunately its not as robust as youtube but the lack of service placed ads make it nice and LTT uploads their videos there a week early so you actually get something for your $4 a month.


Its a tough situation because youtube is so many different things for so many different people on the consumer and creator side of the fence. I think that they should keep their current model and add a "Premium" subscription where the fees would be in the $4 per month range and there are no ads. Also, working with professional creators who make all their money (and may also have employees like Linus Media Group) to feature their own ads instead of the horrible ads that are currently on there would go a long way to making it a viable business model in my opinion.

[foundingfathers]

Disable java and JS and most that crap wont run.