And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
Forum rules
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read the forum rules. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 30 days after creation.
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read the forum rules. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 30 days after creation.
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
Don't know if it's still the same but the last time i tried Ublock Origin on youtube the Ublock numbers ran into the 100's and never stopped.
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... e-Learning
Instead of the usual 2 or 3 ads they are now all over their webpage , so that's an improvement. <--------------- SarcasmGoogle today rolled out their Auto Ads technology that utilizes machine learning for coming up with the placement and selection of ads.
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
I'm not seeing any of that here ( using Waterfox / uBlock Origin / NoScript )
To watch Youtube I just need one click in NoScript .... " Temporarily allow all this page "
and no sign of ads anywhere .
Maybe I'm just lucky .... " If it ain't broken it's because it needs more tweaking "
- absque fenestris
- Level 12
- Posts: 4110
- Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:42 pm
- Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
Google is a very poor company - they can't afford 32bit support and no supporter who tells them that they don't. As a result pop-up messages like "Please install Chrome" on a 32bit system like mine are a bit strange.Lucap wrote: ⤴Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:35 am https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... e-Learning
Instead of the usual 2 or 3 ads they are now all over their webpage , so that's an improvement. <--------------- SarcasmGoogle today rolled - out their Auto Ads technology that utilizes machine learning for coming up with the placement and selection of ads.
Last edited by absque fenestris on Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
If you like ads, don't complain.
If you don't, make them go away. Either way, don't complain.
If you don't, make them go away. Either way, don't complain.
If your issue is solved, kindly indicate that by editing the first post in the topic, and adding [SOLVED] to the title. Thanks!
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
Here in the UK Google spams us with a "A privacy reminder from Google" rather than the usual please install Chrome that most people get.absque fenestris wrote: ⤴Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:07 am Google is a very poor company - they can't afford 32bit support and no supporter who tells them that they don't. As a result pop-up messages like "Please install Chrome" on a 32bit system like mine are a bit strange.
- absque fenestris
- Level 12
- Posts: 4110
- Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 8:42 pm
- Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
We should not complain! We should not complain! We should not complain!Lucap wrote: ⤴Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:37 amHere in the UK Google spams us with a "A privacy reminder from Google" rather than the usual please install Chrome that most people get.absque fenestris wrote: ⤴Thu Feb 22, 2018 3:07 am Google is a very poor company - they can't afford 32bit support and no supporter who tells them that they don't. As a result pop-up messages like "Please install Chrome" on a 32bit system like mine are a bit strange.
- AZgl1800
- Level 20
- Posts: 11168
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:20 am
- Location: Oklahoma where the wind comes Sweeping down the Plains
- Contact:
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
Now that I have Privacy Badger and uBlock Origin installed, I am not bothered with ads any more.
Purposely have been reading new.google.com and linking to all the bad offenders in the advertising game, and so far, I am still not seeing any adverts.
If you care, here is a full screenshot of the Chicago Tribune with usually is full of advertisements.
https://i.imgur.com/NW7RYw1.png
Purposely have been reading new.google.com and linking to all the bad offenders in the advertising game, and so far, I am still not seeing any adverts.
If you care, here is a full screenshot of the Chicago Tribune with usually is full of advertisements.
https://i.imgur.com/NW7RYw1.png
- Portreve
- Level 13
- Posts: 4870
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:03 am
- Location: Within 20,004 km of YOU!
- Contact:
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
So many institutional or legal structures have come into existence since the late 1990s, and significantly moreso since the 2000s, with which I simply do not agree.
ASCAP and BMI, for instance, have tried to force bars, restaurants, and other businesses to sign licenses and pay money for playing music in their establishments. They have tried to force through our legal system that any public performance of an artist's material is eligible for payment, or subject to legal liability on the basis of infringement. In theory, singing, humming, or whistling a tune in public legally runs afoul of this.
My reaction is that I have never signed any agreement or contract with ASCAP, BMI, or anyone else to agree to such a policy, and I do not and will not recognize its legitimacy. Now, to be fair, I don't own a business so I've nothing for them to try and come after, but I simply refuse to play along with this nonsense as a matter of principle.
When it comes to the "Usage of our website constitutes [automatic] acceptance of associated terms and conditions", this is often called "shrinkwrap licensing" because of license agreements being located inside of a box that's shrinkwrapped (to prevent pilfering) that you can't agree to without breaking the shrinkwrap to gain access to read, thus usually making the item (typically software) non-returnable. Insofar as website-type agreements are concerned, their actual enforceability in court is a gray area, from everything I've ever seen written on the subject.
Now, as a practical matter, websites can and often will block content if they detect an ad blocker or other (from their perspective) "objectionable" web browser software component is installed on your computer. My attitude then is I will not, upon initial discovery of this being the case, return to their web site. I will not allow myself to be manipulated or controlled by an external entity wherever it is possible to prevent it, absolutely when that external entity is a purely commercial one. For example, there are a number of bridges in the area where I live, and across the state there are any of a number of toll roads, all of which you can make cash payments to use, or elect to use a transponder. I don't agree to the terms and conditions of the transponder/toll authorities, and therefore I pay cash when I have no practical alternative but to use them, and I otherwise avoid them altogether. Also, any sports game that's broadcast carries with it a legal disclaimer stating you're not allowed to rebroadcast or in any form repeat the contents of the game. Though I'm confident they won't do anything about it, that means just discussing the game with someone else is against their "terms and conditions". If I was into sports (which I'm not) then that alone would dissuade me from ever watching a sports game.
ASCAP and BMI, for instance, have tried to force bars, restaurants, and other businesses to sign licenses and pay money for playing music in their establishments. They have tried to force through our legal system that any public performance of an artist's material is eligible for payment, or subject to legal liability on the basis of infringement. In theory, singing, humming, or whistling a tune in public legally runs afoul of this.
My reaction is that I have never signed any agreement or contract with ASCAP, BMI, or anyone else to agree to such a policy, and I do not and will not recognize its legitimacy. Now, to be fair, I don't own a business so I've nothing for them to try and come after, but I simply refuse to play along with this nonsense as a matter of principle.
When it comes to the "Usage of our website constitutes [automatic] acceptance of associated terms and conditions", this is often called "shrinkwrap licensing" because of license agreements being located inside of a box that's shrinkwrapped (to prevent pilfering) that you can't agree to without breaking the shrinkwrap to gain access to read, thus usually making the item (typically software) non-returnable. Insofar as website-type agreements are concerned, their actual enforceability in court is a gray area, from everything I've ever seen written on the subject.
Now, as a practical matter, websites can and often will block content if they detect an ad blocker or other (from their perspective) "objectionable" web browser software component is installed on your computer. My attitude then is I will not, upon initial discovery of this being the case, return to their web site. I will not allow myself to be manipulated or controlled by an external entity wherever it is possible to prevent it, absolutely when that external entity is a purely commercial one. For example, there are a number of bridges in the area where I live, and across the state there are any of a number of toll roads, all of which you can make cash payments to use, or elect to use a transponder. I don't agree to the terms and conditions of the transponder/toll authorities, and therefore I pay cash when I have no practical alternative but to use them, and I otherwise avoid them altogether. Also, any sports game that's broadcast carries with it a legal disclaimer stating you're not allowed to rebroadcast or in any form repeat the contents of the game. Though I'm confident they won't do anything about it, that means just discussing the game with someone else is against their "terms and conditions". If I was into sports (which I'm not) then that alone would dissuade me from ever watching a sports game.
Flying this flag in support of freedom 🇺🇦
Recommended keyboard layout: English (intl., with AltGR dead keys)
Podcasts: Linux Unplugged, Destination Linux
Also check out Thor Hartmannsson's Linux Tips YouTube Channel
Recommended keyboard layout: English (intl., with AltGR dead keys)
Podcasts: Linux Unplugged, Destination Linux
Also check out Thor Hartmannsson's Linux Tips YouTube Channel
-
- Level 4
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:54 am
- Location: Cincinnati OH
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
I like that 'fresh air' stance from FL....fresh air is good for the soul. I detest those news digests which shift you to the originator page, which then tells you you can't read unless you subscribe.
- AZgl1800
- Level 20
- Posts: 11168
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:20 am
- Location: Oklahoma where the wind comes Sweeping down the Plains
- Contact:
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
I too dislike those types of news sites.... but Firefox has a way around that, you just click on the Text icon in the URL line and it pops up a straight text version of what you want to read, and the advertisements go bye byeoxygenfarm wrote: ⤴Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:49 pm I like that 'fresh air' stance from FL....fresh air is good for the soul. I detest those news digests which shift you to the originator page, which then tells you you can't read unless you subscribe.
Re: And they all wonder why we insist on ad and tracking blockers
I completely agree, I despise being tracked, monetized, and snooped on all over the internet. If I go to a site that tells me I have an ad blocker, then I leave and do not return.