If Google is going to be aggressively fighting against ad blocking, they should be held to a far higher, potentially legal, standard for ensuring safe advertisements.
Because one of the really important reasons for using ad blocking is safety from scams and malware. And Google owns THE largest ad network, and it serves malicious ads every day.
A Monday post in YouTube's help forum notes netizens using applications that strip out adverts while streaming YouTube videos may encounter playback issues due to buffering or error messages indicating that the content is not available.
"We want to emphasize that our terms don’t allow third-party apps to turn off ads because that prevents the creator from being rewarded for viewership, and Ads on YouTube help support creators and let billions of people around the world use the streaming service," said a YouTube team member identified as Rob. "We also understand that some people prefer an entirely ad-free experience, which is why we offer YouTube Premium."
Fuck yeah I'm blocking ads now and forever. I also use VPN, Tor, NextDNS filtering etc. and I do not appreciate your tone here, sir. I value my privacy and mental health.
Can we please stop these desperate and annoying money-begging tactics?
#AdBlockers will be limited to 30,000 rules … no more
They will no longer be able to update themselves daily, but only when new versions of extensions are published (which Google sometimes takes up to 3 weeks to validate)
To sum up, #AdBlocking extensions will always be late on websites, and in any case will not have enough rules to cover all sites.
Interesting paper about #adblocking that I just found out :blobcathugublock:
Energy Conservation with Open Source Ad Blockers
This study, although preliminary, clearly showed enormous potential for open source ad blockers to reduce consumer time waiting for Internet ads to load as well as the electricity needed to run their computers (and other electronic technologies) during that time. In addition, the externalities (including premature fatalities) associated with fossil-fuel-based electricity spent using computers by eliminating ads during Internet browsing and video streaming would be reduced.
#EU#Germany#AdBlocking: "Companies increasingly aim to control how users interact with their content online, threatening user freedom. As more companies crack down on browser extensions and other third-party software used by internet users to customise their experiences, two recent German court cases on adblockers could strengthen the legal case for user control over technology."
As malvertising continues to rise, increasingly delivering #malware and redirecting users to #phishing websites, more and more websites plead with visitors to disable their adblockers. Even Google has responded harshly to adblockers across its platforms...
Should you always disable your adblocker when asked? I don't think you should - targeted ads have shown to be quite the security risk on top of being invasive to your #privacy.
I'm so tired of the discourse on #adblocking being framed as users vs. creators.
Creators suffer from rampant unregulated advertising attached to their hard work. Seeing their labours being exploited to promote scams and enrich surveillance capitalists with no control or recourse. Seeing potential subscribers close the tab because their impression of the channel in those crucial first few seconds was some obnoxious ad.
You think makers want this system? Hell no. We just want an income.
#Privacy#Adblocking#Economics: "In one generation, we have gone from buying Computer Shopper for the ads to a whole ad blocking software development scene. What happened? The advertising that people are blocking now is different from what advertising mostly used to be, and most of the ways it’s different get lumped together under privacy.
Alessandro Acquisti writes, in The Economics of Privacy at a Crossroads, I argue that as economists we have, by and large, adopted a reductionist view of privacy that overlooks the richness and nuance of the contemporary debate around privacy.
Part of the problem, it seems to me, is the idea that people are balancing privacy harms on one side against supposed benefits of personalized advertising on the other side. But the harms are documented, while the benefits are...just kind of assumed. Meanwhile, a substantial body of literature supports the argument that personalization has built-in costs of its own. So privacy regulations and technology that limit personalization could be failing to get credit for some important economic wins. If you look at the math, a personalized message carries less information than a message sent without knowledge of the recipient."
lmao imagine how butthurt someone must be to give #ublockorigin a one-star review in the Firefox Addons...
Like, they can't even hide it. Anyone who rated it one star is a butthurt advertiser shill. Take your tracking shit and get the fuck out of my browsing.