Google pulls the plug on uBlock Origin, leaving over 30 million Chrome users susceptible to intrusive ads
Google pulls the plug on uBlock Origin, leaving over 30 million Chrome users susceptible to intrusive ads
Google ramps up its campaign against ad blockers on Chrome.
You're viewing a single thread.
I wonder if this leaves Chrome users susceptible to ads that load malware, which has been a problem for the last decade, and a driver of adblocking extension development. You can get spyware and worms from Forbes, for instance.
Adblocking is not just a matter of a cleaner internet experience, but also of good internet hygiene
Google says Manifest v3 is being done "for security reasons" but what they don't say is that it's not for your security.
It's a Judge Dredd situation.
Google is vertically integrating the roles of content provider (ads) and content server so that web pages load exactly the way the page's developer expects them to. This necessarily excludes things that selectively filter content, like blockers.
They're essentially taking an open framefork for the web and replacing it with interactive pdfs, that show exactly what the web developer wants, and collects exactly the information the developer wants to know about you.
If you think you should have more control, use Firefox. Anyone using Chrome is complict at this point.
Ublock origin isn't the only ad blocker out there. If you like Ublock origin, use Ublock origin lite. It's fully V3 compliant.
Not so effective against the likes of YouTube allegedly.
Oh yeah, I have a feeling we're about to see 2000s level bullshit on computers/phones again.
The majority of people already don't use ad blockers though. The Chrome Web Store says that 34 million people use (used?) uBlock Origin, while it's estimated that around 3.3 billion people use Chrome. If those numbers are correct, only around 1% of Chrome users use uBlock Origin.
I feel sorry for that 3.26 billion people, most of whom have to deal with ads, spyware and malware.
What’s the alternative to ads, though? Not everyone wants to (or can afford to) pay for every site they use.
its not just ads and malware, and its not only about beeing sorry for them. ads are also manipulating how people think. not only the obvious things like "that product is good", but also that products in general would help (with problems you didn't have). and the format itself of ads (even without considering its contents) already has a changing effects on the minds of those who watch it. i am thinking of some parts of neil postmans thoughts about television back then and i guess there is plenty of possibilities to make a realistic conspiracy theory out of it why exactly the most poisonous parts of television are replicated to the internet with massive force even though everyone ignores ads in the net. i like theories
unfortunately, feeling sorry for them does not help society to stability. 😥
What's the alternative to ads, though? Not everyone wants to (or can afford to) pay for every site they use.
What’s the alternative to ads, though? Not everyone wants to (or can afford to) pay for every site they use.
its not about paying for the site a user uses, its about paying those who run the site (and less to pay for someone only "managing" the site by doing actually nothing)
maybe these could be alternatives:
- patreon
flattr- micropayment in general
- donations (somafm runs on donations)
- link to shopping platforms (musicians on somafm mostly have links to the songs on amazon that you see while playing the song for free)
- communities, like FSF, local groups
- some small payed supporter part (like lwn.net) while the important stuff that makes the win-win of the site is free to use
- maybe the list from this page can help too: https://kinsta.com/de/blog/patreon-alternativen/
Kickstarter Indiegogo Podia Sellfy Buy Me a Coffee Memberful Hypage Ko-fi Substack Kajabi Gumroad WooCommerce Mighty Networks MemberPress Uscreen
maybe even a combination of multiple of those *whoa!!!! mindblow!!! could be a good choice to allow usersvto choose how to contribute.
so really only choosing to offer exactly one option that also puts all users at a real risk of real attacks where they can get ripped off of all or lots of their real money and data for the sake if earning 0.003 ¢ per each putting them at high risk is not really what should be done, or do you personally profit from their users high risk and are thus completely okay with it? hope not.
if you have to earn money with your project or whatever, why not offer several options to choose from? why only one? and while we're at it, offering an ad-free "membership" for 400 times the price of what they would earn by the same visitor with ads like they try here sometimes, does not make any platform look good, but the opposite.
there are many platforms that i would pay for monthly and i would spend much more money alltogether than now on that if their price would not be artificially pushed into astronomically heights per service...
there is one project where i do donate each month a little bit via recurring bank transfer since years. my transfer says the name of the project and "donation" thats pretty easy to setup for both sides, but too complicated for those who pay designers money so they can place the ad layers on top of the 400 other layers of spypixels and navigation controls.. really ? lol*
if those you are talking about cannot afford to have a bank account for some reason, i guess they also cannot receive the revenue of ads on their webpages ;+)
saying there are no alternatives to ads is rather a candidate for the lamest excuse award ;-)