4 ms·

How will Brave prevent anti-ad-blocking mechanisms from interfering with the page? For example, cbs/abc/nbc seem to detect muBlock and then stop serving conten

by abhv 11y ago

How will Brave prevent anti-ad-blocking mechanisms from interfering with the page? For example, cbs/abc/nbc seem to detect muBlock and then stop serving content.

kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
This is the most annoying thing about ad blocking going mainstream. It was a rare site that bothered to detect us before Apple got into the game.
- Nursie 11y ago
  Personally I think it's very healthy and marks the beginning of the next stage of the web - how does it work in a post-advertising world?
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    If the various stages of the arms race have been any indication so far it tends to get worse rather than better with every stage so far, which does not lead me to believe there will be a 'post advertising world', only a 'more annoying and harder to get rid of / ignore advertising world'.
    - Nursie 11y ago
      Well it's true, it has been an arms race, but until recently it's been between relatively small numbers of blockers and the advertisers. Now that Apple have taken it more mainstream it's going to be interesting to watch what happens. But you might be right, sadly. More of the same and worse...
  - woah 11y ago
    Randomized ad unit class names?
    - Klathmon 11y ago
      and/or ad-proxies that run off the same domain, more integrated and less "blockable" ads (like sponsored stories and in-content ad reads), complicated and bloated JS ad-blocker-blockers (or ad-blocker-detectors), even more complicated ad-blocking code (which can already have a pretty significant performance impact on some sites), and more. It's a race to the bottom now boys, and the most invasive ad companies are going to win!
  - sevensor 11y ago
    Ads become integrated with, and indistinguishable from, copy.
- lmm 11y ago
  I found web adverts got a lot more annoying after Firefox started including a pop-up blocker by default. That was when we started seeing pop-unders, animated Flash ads and all that.
  - Klathmon 11y ago
    I've been saying for years that blockers just remove the good guys. What's the point in trying to make a safe, non-tracking, curated ad network when you will just be blocked by everyone anyway? All adblockers do its turn the game into a race to the bottom. Whoever can get the most invasive ads past the most blockers is the winner. Any company that isn't willing to play dirty will be left behind. Content creators won't push for the good guys because they need money, ad networks are between a rock and a hard-place, and users will say they want "nice" ad networks while simultaneously blocking all ads regardless of where they come from (and will fight against things like the "allow acceptable ads" checkbox in adblock)
    - rockdoe 11y ago
      I think you just described why Mozilla was pushing for Tracking Protection (blocking only "bad" ads) and didn't do Brave.
      - Klathmon 11y ago
        even widespread Tracking Protection isn't the answer IMO. I personally want to be tracked on some things. I want ads that are relevant to me instead of ads that cater to the lowest common denominator. I want websites to be able to view my usage and cater to my wants/needs without me having to spend time trying to fill out surveys on how i use their service (and probably remember things wrong), I want automated recommendations for things that i might like without me having to spend hours curating my own content. I don't want invasive 3rd parties getting ahold of my information, "push" advertising like cold-calls, emails, push notifications, or physical mail, and i don't want sensitive information being collected and shared. Sadly nobody ever tries to make that distinction, it's always "everything" or "nothing".
notahacker 11y ago
Presumably it makes it easier to do so. To be honest, if I was running a media company I'd be rather more inclined to block/redirect users of browsers designed to inject replacement "good" ads into my page than worry about users on a mainstream browser who happen to be using a plugin.

by abhv 11y ago

How will Brave prevent anti-ad-blocking mechanisms from interfering with the page? For example, cbs/abc/nbc seem to detect muBlock and then stop serving content.

kevin_thibedeau 11y ago

This is the most annoying thing about ad blocking going mainstream. It was a rare site that bothered to detect us before Apple got into the game.

Nursie 11y ago
Personally I think it's very healthy and marks the beginning of the next stage of the web - how does it work in a post-advertising world?
- jacquesm 11y ago
  If the various stages of the arms race have been any indication so far it tends to get worse rather than better with every stage so far, which does not lead me to believe there will be a 'post advertising world', only a 'more annoying and harder to get rid of / ignore advertising world'.
  - Nursie 11y ago
    Well it's true, it has been an arms race, but until recently it's been between relatively small numbers of blockers and the advertisers. Now that Apple have taken it more mainstream it's going to be interesting to watch what happens. But you might be right, sadly. More of the same and worse...
- woah 11y ago
  Randomized ad unit class names?
  - Klathmon 11y ago
    and/or ad-proxies that run off the same domain, more integrated and less "blockable" ads (like sponsored stories and in-content ad reads), complicated and bloated JS ad-blocker-blockers (or ad-blocker-detectors), even more complicated ad-blocking code (which can already have a pretty significant performance impact on some sites), and more. It's a race to the bottom now boys, and the most invasive ad companies are going to win!
- sevensor 11y ago
  Ads become integrated with, and indistinguishable from, copy.
lmm 11y ago
I found web adverts got a lot more annoying after Firefox started including a pop-up blocker by default. That was when we started seeing pop-unders, animated Flash ads and all that.
- Klathmon 11y ago
  I've been saying for years that blockers just remove the good guys. What's the point in trying to make a safe, non-tracking, curated ad network when you will just be blocked by everyone anyway? All adblockers do its turn the game into a race to the bottom. Whoever can get the most invasive ads past the most blockers is the winner. Any company that isn't willing to play dirty will be left behind. Content creators won't push for the good guys because they need money, ad networks are between a rock and a hard-place, and users will say they want "nice" ad networks while simultaneously blocking all ads regardless of where they come from (and will fight against things like the "allow acceptable ads" checkbox in adblock)
  - rockdoe 11y ago
    I think you just described why Mozilla was pushing for Tracking Protection (blocking only "bad" ads) and didn't do Brave.
    - Klathmon 11y ago
      even widespread Tracking Protection isn't the answer IMO. I personally want to be tracked on some things. I want ads that are relevant to me instead of ads that cater to the lowest common denominator. I want websites to be able to view my usage and cater to my wants/needs without me having to spend time trying to fill out surveys on how i use their service (and probably remember things wrong), I want automated recommendations for things that i might like without me having to spend hours curating my own content. I don't want invasive 3rd parties getting ahold of my information, "push" advertising like cold-calls, emails, push notifications, or physical mail, and i don't want sensitive information being collected and shared. Sadly nobody ever tries to make that distinction, it's always "everything" or "nothing".

notahacker 11y ago

Presumably it makes it easier to do so. To be honest, if I was running a media company I'd be rather more inclined to block/redirect users of browsers designed to inject replacement "good" ads into my page than worry about users on a mainstream browser who happen to be using a plugin.