4 ms·

Why would you'd want to obfuscate instead of block the ads?

by guelo 11y ago

sysread 11y ago
"It’s increasingly hard to “opt out” of online tracking. “Unless you want to go live in a cave away from society,” Nissenbaum notes, you need to be online—often for work or to access government services. Online services claim they’re voluntary, but the cost of being a refusenik grows every day."
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
joering2 11y ago
Spending over $100,000 per month on advertising online, we do analyze traffic under the microscope. Blocking ads only means Publisher has to display more of it to even out the good traffic. Continuesly bringing people that are totally off te chart in re to our vertical (due to someone fooling system of their true interests) would bring down ROI to near-zero and have us stop using said Publisher althogether. Genius move!
rasz_pl 11y ago
Because there are 14 trackers on wired.com. Because: >One, AdNauseam, clicks every ad on every page I visit Wired would like you do install addons that click on every ad on wired.com.
- x0x0 11y ago
  I would bet good money those clicks are never counted. Each exchange should rapidly flag 100% clickers.
fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
Blocking breaks webpages sometimes. Part time blocking can create even more focused profiles Poisoning the well is better if you aren't willing to or can't commit to 100% blocking. Obfuscating snoopers' profiles is more satisfying.
- vive-la-liberte 11y ago
  I use uBlock Origin and unlike with NoScript which I was using for a while before, haven't had a single problem.
superuser2 11y ago
Since most advertising and tracking currently happens by loading third-party Javascript, it's trivial for clients to detect and block. If advertiser-hostile clients proliferate, the industry will shift towards techniques that are more difficult to block. Proxy ads through software on the actual webserver; make them part of the markup like any other page element. Ingest the Apache access logs. Use website-level cookies and relay them to the ad network on the server side. Etc.
- malka 11y ago
  Would not that require the advertiser to trust the publisher ?
oakwhiz 11y ago
Why not do both?

Why would you'd want to obfuscate instead of block the ads?

by guelo 11y ago

Why would you'd want to obfuscate instead of block the ads?

"It’s increasingly hard to “opt out” of online tracking. “Unless you want to go live in a cave away from society,” Nissenbaum notes, you need to be online—often for work or to access government services. Online services claim they’re voluntary, but the cost of being a refusenik grows every day."

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

joering2 11y ago

Spending over $100,000 per month on advertising online, we do analyze traffic under the microscope. Blocking ads only means Publisher has to display more of it to even out the good traffic. Continuesly bringing people that are totally off te chart in re to our vertical (due to someone fooling system of their true interests) would bring down ROI to near-zero and have us stop using said Publisher althogether. Genius move!

rasz_pl 11y ago

Because there are 14 trackers on wired.com. Because: >One, AdNauseam, clicks every ad on every page I visit Wired would like you do install addons that click on every ad on wired.com.

x0x0 11y ago
I would bet good money those clicks are never counted. Each exchange should rapidly flag 100% clickers.

fnordfnordfnord 11y ago

Blocking breaks webpages sometimes. Part time blocking can create even more focused profiles Poisoning the well is better if you aren't willing to or can't commit to 100% blocking. Obfuscating snoopers' profiles is more satisfying.

vive-la-liberte 11y ago
I use uBlock Origin and unlike with NoScript which I was using for a while before, haven't had a single problem.

superuser2 11y ago

Since most advertising and tracking currently happens by loading third-party Javascript, it's trivial for clients to detect and block. If advertiser-hostile clients proliferate, the industry will shift towards techniques that are more difficult to block. Proxy ads through software on the actual webserver; make them part of the markup like any other page element. Ingest the Apache access logs. Use website-level cookies and relay them to the ad network on the server side. Etc.

malka 11y ago
Would not that require the advertiser to trust the publisher ?

oakwhiz 11y ago

Why not do both?