3 ms·

It's really disappointing that all those the-sky-is-falling articles from tech journalists have apparently caused this. Nothing has changed, no new issues were

by TillE 11y ago

It's really disappointing that all those the-sky-is-falling articles from tech journalists have apparently caused this. Nothing has changed, no new issues were raised. Marco has talked about and basically supported ad blocking in the past. I guess he just doesn't feel like being the focus of their ire right now.

tptacek 11y ago
That's not true. Normal people as a general rule don't install much software on their computers, and they install even fewer browser extensions (now that it's harder to trick them into doing that). But people do install apps; they're crazy about apps. There are popular, good publications on the Internet that get 80+% of their revenue from ads, and those publications have a huge iOS readership, and those iOS users tend to be on later iOS versions. Publishers aren't making it up: they're going to take a pay cut because of the content blocker features on iOS.
- vermontdevil 11y ago
  I thought ad blockers on iOS only block ads on Safari web pages, not ads within apps?
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Yes, that's true. A lot of people have been interpreting iOS content blocking as Apple's way of pushing people to make more apps. Content blockers also can't block Apple's official "hey, we have an app for this web site" banner that you can have Safari show for your site.
    - sangnoir 11y ago
      How deliciously overt. Increase apps ecosystem & destroy competitors revenue in one blow. Which is good news for privacy because the one thing that can't track you is an app on your mobile device.
- TillE 11y ago
  What's not true? Marco has explicitly written about iOS content blockers in the past few months. Nothing has changed since then. It's a $3 app that requires configuration. It's not Angry Birds. Also, I'm seeing a lot of claims with zero stats to back them up. The iOS top charts are extremely volatile. A few thousand nerds installing ad blockers will impact tech publications to some extent, but I'm extremely skeptical that it's the end of the world even for them. It should mean almost nothing for other sites with broader audiences.

by TillE 11y ago

tptacek 11y ago

That's not true. Normal people as a general rule don't install much software on their computers, and they install even fewer browser extensions (now that it's harder to trick them into doing that). But people do install apps; they're crazy about apps. There are popular, good publications on the Internet that get 80+% of their revenue from ads, and those publications have a huge iOS readership, and those iOS users tend to be on later iOS versions. Publishers aren't making it up: they're going to take a pay cut because of the content blocker features on iOS.

vermontdevil 11y ago
I thought ad blockers on iOS only block ads on Safari web pages, not ads within apps?
- mikeash 11y ago
  Yes, that's true. A lot of people have been interpreting iOS content blocking as Apple's way of pushing people to make more apps. Content blockers also can't block Apple's official "hey, we have an app for this web site" banner that you can have Safari show for your site.
  - sangnoir 11y ago
    How deliciously overt. Increase apps ecosystem & destroy competitors revenue in one blow. Which is good news for privacy because the one thing that can't track you is an app on your mobile device.
TillE 11y ago
What's not true? Marco has explicitly written about iOS content blockers in the past few months. Nothing has changed since then. It's a $3 app that requires configuration. It's not Angry Birds. Also, I'm seeing a lot of claims with zero stats to back them up. The iOS top charts are extremely volatile. A few thousand nerds installing ad blockers will impact tech publications to some extent, but I'm extremely skeptical that it's the end of the world even for them. It should mean almost nothing for other sites with broader audiences.