10 ms·

Opera: Introducing native ad-blocking feature for faster browsing

137 points by riqbal 11y ago

Flimm 11y ago
Interesting comment from one of the blog moderators: > We don't prioritize in any way our ads network. The most important is speed and user experience. We are not in the extortion business model as ABP.
- scriptproof 11y ago
  Future of browsers: each editor blocks all ads but that of its own network.
  - paulryanrogers 11y ago
    I wonder how close Brave is to exactly this future.
- riledhel 11y ago
  Related, somewhat, but what are good alternatives to ABP??
  - ant6n 11y ago
    uBlock origin
  - Touche 11y ago
    Opera, apparently.
  - falcolas 11y ago
    http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ Requires a touch more technical knowledge, but works across all browsers and applications. I still get blocked by Forbes, but it's more funny (in a tragic sense) than anything else.
JetSpiegel 11y ago
No comparisons to uBlock Origin? That's the state of the art, no ABP.
- Socketubs 11y ago
  I agree.
- Touche 11y ago
  No hard evidence, but in some light testing this morning Opera is blocking more ads than uBlock Origin. They might calculate differently though.
  - gorhill 11y ago
    > Opera is blocking more ads than uBlock Origin Source? Or at least some specific details on how I could reproduce myself this? In case the number of network requests was used to measure this (assuming Opera reports the number of network requests blocked), one must be careful with this specific measurement.[1] [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-%22This-other-extension-reports-more-stuff-blocked!%22 https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-%22This-other-e...
raldu 11y ago
I am not sure how to react. On the one hand, it seems like a good thing at the first sight. On the other, with ad-blocking becoming more and more mainstream, and the discussion looking more like clashes and agreements between companies, wouldn't advertisements find new ways of seeking attention, eventually evolving into something that we cannot escape? What if they find a way to ban ad-blocking? What if web becomes completely binary, somehow making ad-blockers obsolete?[1][2] What do you think? [1]: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/12/compiling-to-webassembly-its-happening/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/12/compiling-to-webassembly-i... [2]: http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/google-microsoft-mozilla-and-others-team-up-to-launch-webassembly-a-new-binary-format-for-the-web/ http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/google-microsoft-mozilla-an...
- franciscop 11y ago
  That's highly speculative and phrased in a way impossible to answer: > eventually evolving into something that we cannot escape? What I think: if they find a way to block adblockers, we'll find a way to block the adblock blockers! It looks like a fight that will keep going on for some time. Until they make ads so good that they are indistinguishable from good content, then we'd won [1] I now block the blockers naturally, just not following those pesky links. I would love some statistics for instance, from the times Forbes and others are in the top HN page before vs after they completely started blocking adblock. [1] https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
  - blackoil 11y ago
    Or they make content even worse to make it difficult to differ and we lose
  - untog 11y ago
    I think the "something that we cannot escape" the OP is describing is already here in the form of "native ads", which are advertisements presented as articles. Buzzfeed does a lot of them, and there's a non-zero cognitive load in differentiating (since they look so much like articles). I'm really not sure they're better than ads. They're certainly more deceiving.
rockdoe 11y ago
"We are the first major browser vendor to integrate an ad-blocking feature" Firefox had it first. Enabling it's tracking protection makes almost all ads go away (because ads track you). They're also forgetting Brave.
- StripeNoGood 11y ago
  Lol Opera had ad blocker even before FF existed you dumb ass ;) (Presto engine)
- dao- 11y ago
  Brave is no major browser. Then again, if you look at the market share and depending on where you draw the line, Opera isn't a major browser either (1.68% according to netmarketshare.com).
  - Grishnakh 11y ago
    I'm just guessing that 1.68% is still one or two orders of magnitude greater than the marketshare of Brave.
- majke 11y ago
  Firefox's "tracking protection" only works in private mode, right?
  - dao- 11y ago
    You can enable it for non-private windows by setting privacy.trackingprotection.enabled to true in about:config.
    - RodericDay 11y ago
      I hate that this is not more visible, like in the Preferences pane.
      - Etzos 11y ago
jkot 11y ago
I would argue /etc/hosts based blocking is faster
- noondip 11y ago
  Faster, but less comprehensive. Many web sites serve content and ads off the same domain. Personally, I like uBlock Origin in combination with uMatrix in the browser, with privoxy and dnsmasq in use system-wide.
- dexterdog 11y ago
  When you need a hosts file as big as you need for good ad blocking it can get pretty slow.
  - kup0 11y ago
    I think this is the case on older Windows versions but is negligible now on most systems (and apparently fine on Linux, etc., going by replies to a similar post I made a while back)
- jlarocco 11y ago
  /etc/hosts doesn't work for a lot of ads, so no matter how fast it is, it's not a complete solution unless there's a browser based (or very intelligent proxy server) on top of it.
threatofrain 11y ago
While this may be nice for the end user, the fact that Opera is in the process of being bought out by a Chinese consortium for $1.2B makes me think Opera will soon block more than ads, and will also track users.
- nononoxd 11y ago
  Yeah, right beacuse Windows, Chrome, Android don't track users /sarcasm
LeoNatan25 11y ago
> A smarter approach to ad-blocking > Opera’s ad-blocking feature is deactivated by default. Not so smart, it seems.
amelius 11y ago
"It seems you are using Opera. Please use a different browser if you want to view our content."
- bnegreve 11y ago
  I wonder if blocking ad-blocking people from viewing content is viable in the long term. People producing content want to maximize the probability for their content to go viral don't they? Blocking anybody (ad-blocking or not) seems counter productive.
- sean-duffy 11y ago
  To which the response should always be to use the same browser to view different content!
- tomjen3 11y ago
  Back when Firefox was the only browser that had adblocker extensions that was what some sites said, but it didn't catch on.
- mtgx 11y ago
  Well that's happening anyway with some sites if you're using ad-blocking. So the situation is no different. I imagine those users will just switch to a different source rather than give up the ad-blocking.
usharf 11y ago
Biggest problem with with ads is tracking (privacy). Performance is an issue, but I'm not surprised that opera is making it sound as that's really the problem. Privacy concerns are mentioned briefly. Mozilla aporoach to ad blocking is truly user/consumer oriented, not just a lame attempt to still control and revenu from the whitelisting market.
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  That might be the case, but I don't think it is. In my experience, people dislike adverts on the web because they are obtrusive, obnoxious, and slow. Tracking is fairly low down the list of complaints.
- bobajeff 11y ago
  Pretty sure uBlock Origin doesn't have a whitelisting service or anything. They just do what it is they are supposed to do.
- 0x0 11y ago
  I'd say the biggest problem is malwertising
- CaptSpify 11y ago
  > Biggest problem with with ads is tracking (privacy) There are a lot of problems with ads. And if you ask 5 people what the biggest one is, your going to get 5 different answers. Rather than point out which one is the "biggest", we should point out which reason we are focusing on.
unicornporn 11y ago
Ironic, considering Opera has their own ad network[1]... [1] http://operamediaworks.com/ http://operamediaworks.com/
- outside1234 11y ago
  Its only ironic if its blocked as well. Is it?
  - agumonkey 11y ago
    The opposite would ethical.
  - iza 11y ago
    From the comments: > opera.com is whitelisted by default, but you're free to remove it from the whitelist. There are no hard-coded exceptions to allow Opera or Opera Mediaworks ads through. https://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/03/native-ad-blocking-feature-opera-for-computers/#comment-2561805926 https://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/03/native-ad-blocki...
kup0 11y ago
On a brand new install, there are a bunch of whitelisted sites (news and otherwise) I had to remove manually. I'm curious why they are allowing ads on places like NYTimes by default?
- dubcanada 11y ago
  Cause people need to make money? Most people don't have a problem with small ads here and there, what people have a problem with is 75 ads on a page with 2 paragraphs of useful content and 17 download buttons that are ads and only one small link with the actual download.
  - kup0 11y ago
    Yes, but I should be the one to choose, not Opera. They already have ad blocking turned off by default why make people turn it on twice (switch on, then remove site from whitelist) and why decide FOR me which sites I'm supporting by whitelisting? (Not that I actually do that, but hey some people are nice enough to whitelist so I'm making the argument for them. I block all ads and am fine with businesses going under because of it)
Touche 11y ago
I think people are underestimating how big this is. When Brave did it you could excuse it as the action of a startup looking for attention; Opera now legitimizes ad-blocking as being a feature that should be on by default. This is similar to what went down with pop-up blockers, it quickly became a must-have feature. I wouldn't be surprised if Safari was next and to ship their own content blocker in iOS and have it on by default. The question is, how much will this trend cost Google?
- helb 11y ago
  > feature that should be on by default "Opera’s ad-blocking feature is deactivated by default."
  - Touche 11y ago
    I know, but it does have a popup the first time asking if you want to turn it on. It's a step in the right direction.
- xjp251 11y ago
  Qihoo(360) will get all your privacy. A notorious and shameless company. Have you ever think about why Qihoo made this dicision?
  - alanh 11y ago
    Who is Qihoo? What decision?
    - jmiserez 11y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11177438 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11177438 (14 days ago, 71 comments)
  - xjp251 11y ago
    I believe all the website will fight back soon, if opera is detected, then display a message "opera is not supported"
chewyshine 11y ago
Hmmm...Isn't Opera in the process of being taken over by China's Kunlun and Qihoo? With their history, I doubt this will end up being in the users best interest.
jdalgetty 11y ago
Ad blocking is great but we are forgetting that most people will not pay to use a website. Advertisers are going to figure out a away around these things and we'll still end up with ads but at the same time we are going to see many ad supported websites disappear.
- mfoy_ 11y ago
  Yeah... many great sites are already just labours of love as it is... I mean, I hate crappy clickbait sites as much as the next person... but in our effort to thwart those we're really going to put the squeeze on more honest sites as a side effect.
- Grishnakh 11y ago
  The advertisers have only themselves to blame for this mess. They've been abusing users for two decades now: pop-ups, pop-unders, flashing ads, auto-play videos, and now serving outright malware. They've utterly refused to take responsibility for their actions, and only blame users for blocking their ads, despite these ads making it nearly impossible to actually view websites (like when closing a pop-up window causes dozens more pop-up windows to appear) and trashing peoples' systems. Now they want us to feel sorry for them? No.
- tixocloud 11y ago
  I can see sponsored/branded content coming into play.
- Jordrok 11y ago
  So we should just give up, sit back, and take whatever the ad networks see fit to cram down our throats? No thanks. Also, I wouldn't put so much faith in the ability of advertising companies to completely stop adblocking. Similar things have been tried in the past and failed. (See the Betamax case[1] where home TV recording was challenged). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Unive....
- oconnore 11y ago
  This seems like you're assuming the conclusion. When you say, "readers won't pay for sites [and sites cost money]", there are only a few solutions, and they all involve non-readers paying for the reader<->site interaction. As a result, your only solution is hand-wringing about ad blockers, which probably won't result in "advertisers are going to figure out a away around these things", because browsers have complete control over what is displayed. If you don't do this, things get more interesting: - "People won't pay for sites" -> make sites that they will pay for. - "non-readers paying for the reader<->site interaction" -> how can this be consensual, positive? (there are approximately seventy-three people, total, who enjoy web ads. Superbowl doesn't count.) - "[ad supported websites are a good thing]" -> can they be supported publicly? - "ad supported websites disappear" -> maybe in some cases that isn't bad. - "ad supported websites disappear" -> "most people will not pay to use a website" stops being true.
Freestyler_3 11y ago
I didn't minds banner ads and the one or two side bar adds. But then came the between content adds and the clickbait. Also the tracking etc. Sorry, but when adds look more like virusses and some are then I don't want to take the risk. When a website however gives me a warning about my addblocker then I disable it to see how it looks like without addblocker on that website. (I once had a site ask me this and then I got horrible adds with sound and autoplay and loops, that site went back to being blocked very fast)
gorhill 11y ago
Personally I will always be quite uncomfortable when the blocking of ads/tracking/data mining is provided by those with (not necessarily direct) links to the ads/tracking/data mining industry. My view on this is that this is the least worse solution for them to deal with the reality of more and more people using blockers, the worst being the solutions for which the ads/tracking/data mining industry has no say at all -- rather keep some control over none at all.
samfisher83 11y ago
75% of opera revenue in the 4th Q came from ads. I mean it doesn't seem like the best business move.
- ianlevesque 11y ago
  So don't block their own ads? Admittedly the whole situation is clearly devolving / heating up now. It's going to be interesting.
  - samfisher83 11y ago
    I wonder if they do. Maybe someone who uses opera can comment.
    - alanh 11y ago
      Elsewhere in this discussion, an Opera blog moderator was quoted as saying they "do not prioritize their own ad network in any way." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11258292 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11258292
cm3 11y ago
For whatever the default exception list is quite large and clearing it required pressing X for each list entry and the list shrinking in height didn't help because one had to move the mouse cursor around after each delete. Otherwise it seemed to work well. Good on you, Opera!
gorhill 11y ago
Opera 37 dev version is available for linux, so I installed it to perform my own measurements. The example given in Opera's blog post is not very useful, they tested a lightweight page with only one network request blocked. That page loads fast even without a blocker. I preferred testing high-traffic, heavy front pages. The tool to benchmark page load speed is the one I wrote, found at: http://www.raymondhill.net/ublock/pageloadspeed.html http://www.raymondhill.net/ublock/pageloadspeed.html (available on GitHub[1]). Settings: Chrome 50 + uBlock Origin 1.6.4 with default settings. Opera 37 in ad-blocking mode, I did not touch the built-in whitelist. For both browsers, click-to-play was enabled. I disabled the blocking of 3rd-party cookies for both browsers, this is necessary for the page load speed tool to make benchmarked web pages render properly sometimes. For each site benchmarked, I opened a new tab for the page load speed tool. I also tested a web page with nothing to block at all, to test for a case where the CPU cost of the blocking engine can't be offset by the gain of not loading blocked resources. I did not interact with the pages once they loaded, to be sure I benchmarked exactly the same thing. Sometimes merely hovering the mouse over a page can cause javascript code to execute, etc. I didn't want this to happen. From what I could observe, pages looked similar in both browsers, except that there were Taboola ads on Business Insider with Opera, not present with Chrome+uBO (taboola.com is blocked by Peter Lowe's filter list, which is selected by default in uBO). Results: http://cnn.com/ http://cnn.com/ - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 351.65 ms (11/17 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 409.94 ms (11/15 iterations) http://www.washingtonpost.com/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/ - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 933.18 ms (11/14 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 1115.15 ms (11/14 iterations) http://www.businessinsider.com/ http://www.businessinsider.com/ - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 1188.54 ms (11/14 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 1494.69 ms (11/17 iterations) (had clickbait Taboola ads) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 258.51 ms (11/14 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 281.82 ms (11/12 iterations) Note that if you run your own benchmarks using above tool, you can't compare results with someone else's results, as your connection speed may vary with each computer. The results are comparable for the same computer+site with different browsers, or same browser but different blockers, or same browser same blocker but different blocker settings, etc. [1] https://github.com/gorhill/pageloadspeed https://github.com/gorhill/pageloadspeed
- 11y ago
codefightclub 11y ago
How are these websites supposed to make money without ads? Most of them rely on ads to stay afloat, and have been denied from adsense. Whats the plan?
- sdoering 11y ago
  What does give a website the right to include adware or malware and the like into the legitimate UseCase of viwing it? Even if it is just the Ad Network isn't it neglect on the websites part?
  - tn13 11y ago
    All ads are not adware malware and ad blockers aren't blocking just the bad ads.
    - xiaoma 11y ago
      Some ads are not malware.

137 points by riqbal 11y ago

Flimm 11y ago

Interesting comment from one of the blog moderators: > We don't prioritize in any way our ads network. The most important is speed and user experience. We are not in the extortion business model as ABP.

scriptproof 11y ago
Future of browsers: each editor blocks all ads but that of its own network.
- paulryanrogers 11y ago
  I wonder how close Brave is to exactly this future.
riledhel 11y ago
Related, somewhat, but what are good alternatives to ABP??
- ant6n 11y ago
  uBlock origin
- Touche 11y ago
  Opera, apparently.
- falcolas 11y ago
  http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ Requires a touch more technical knowledge, but works across all browsers and applications. I still get blocked by Forbes, but it's more funny (in a tragic sense) than anything else.

JetSpiegel 11y ago

No comparisons to uBlock Origin? That's the state of the art, no ABP.

Socketubs 11y ago
I agree.
Touche 11y ago
No hard evidence, but in some light testing this morning Opera is blocking more ads than uBlock Origin. They might calculate differently though.
- gorhill 11y ago
  > Opera is blocking more ads than uBlock Origin Source? Or at least some specific details on how I could reproduce myself this? In case the number of network requests was used to measure this (assuming Opera reports the number of network requests blocked), one must be careful with this specific measurement.[1] [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-%22This-other-extension-reports-more-stuff-blocked!%22 https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/About-%22This-other-e...

raldu 11y ago

I am not sure how to react. On the one hand, it seems like a good thing at the first sight. On the other, with ad-blocking becoming more and more mainstream, and the discussion looking more like clashes and agreements between companies, wouldn't advertisements find new ways of seeking attention, eventually evolving into something that we cannot escape? What if they find a way to ban ad-blocking? What if web becomes completely binary, somehow making ad-blockers obsolete?[1][2] What do you think? [1]: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/12/compiling-to-webassembly-its-happening/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/12/compiling-to-webassembly-i... [2]: http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/google-microsoft-mozilla-and-others-team-up-to-launch-webassembly-a-new-binary-format-for-the-web/ http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/google-microsoft-mozilla-an...

franciscop 11y ago
That's highly speculative and phrased in a way impossible to answer: > eventually evolving into something that we cannot escape? What I think: if they find a way to block adblockers, we'll find a way to block the adblock blockers! It looks like a fight that will keep going on for some time. Until they make ads so good that they are indistinguishable from good content, then we'd won [1] I now block the blockers naturally, just not following those pesky links. I would love some statistics for instance, from the times Forbes and others are in the top HN page before vs after they completely started blocking adblock. [1] https://xkcd.com/810/ https://xkcd.com/810/
- blackoil 11y ago
  Or they make content even worse to make it difficult to differ and we lose
- untog 11y ago
  I think the "something that we cannot escape" the OP is describing is already here in the form of "native ads", which are advertisements presented as articles. Buzzfeed does a lot of them, and there's a non-zero cognitive load in differentiating (since they look so much like articles). I'm really not sure they're better than ads. They're certainly more deceiving.

rockdoe 11y ago

"We are the first major browser vendor to integrate an ad-blocking feature" Firefox had it first. Enabling it's tracking protection makes almost all ads go away (because ads track you). They're also forgetting Brave.

StripeNoGood 11y ago
Lol Opera had ad blocker even before FF existed you dumb ass ;) (Presto engine)
dao- 11y ago
Brave is no major browser. Then again, if you look at the market share and depending on where you draw the line, Opera isn't a major browser either (1.68% according to netmarketshare.com).
- Grishnakh 11y ago
  I'm just guessing that 1.68% is still one or two orders of magnitude greater than the marketshare of Brave.
majke 11y ago
Firefox's "tracking protection" only works in private mode, right?
- dao- 11y ago
  You can enable it for non-private windows by setting privacy.trackingprotection.enabled to true in about:config.
  - RodericDay 11y ago
    I hate that this is not more visible, like in the Preferences pane.
    - Etzos 11y ago

jkot 11y ago

I would argue /etc/hosts based blocking is faster

noondip 11y ago
Faster, but less comprehensive. Many web sites serve content and ads off the same domain. Personally, I like uBlock Origin in combination with uMatrix in the browser, with privoxy and dnsmasq in use system-wide.
dexterdog 11y ago
When you need a hosts file as big as you need for good ad blocking it can get pretty slow.
- kup0 11y ago
  I think this is the case on older Windows versions but is negligible now on most systems (and apparently fine on Linux, etc., going by replies to a similar post I made a while back)
jlarocco 11y ago
/etc/hosts doesn't work for a lot of ads, so no matter how fast it is, it's not a complete solution unless there's a browser based (or very intelligent proxy server) on top of it.

threatofrain 11y ago

While this may be nice for the end user, the fact that Opera is in the process of being bought out by a Chinese consortium for $1.2B makes me think Opera will soon block more than ads, and will also track users.

nononoxd 11y ago
Yeah, right beacuse Windows, Chrome, Android don't track users /sarcasm

LeoNatan25 11y ago

> A smarter approach to ad-blocking > Opera’s ad-blocking feature is deactivated by default. Not so smart, it seems.

amelius 11y ago

"It seems you are using Opera. Please use a different browser if you want to view our content."

bnegreve 11y ago
I wonder if blocking ad-blocking people from viewing content is viable in the long term. People producing content want to maximize the probability for their content to go viral don't they? Blocking anybody (ad-blocking or not) seems counter productive.
sean-duffy 11y ago
To which the response should always be to use the same browser to view different content!
tomjen3 11y ago
Back when Firefox was the only browser that had adblocker extensions that was what some sites said, but it didn't catch on.
mtgx 11y ago
Well that's happening anyway with some sites if you're using ad-blocking. So the situation is no different. I imagine those users will just switch to a different source rather than give up the ad-blocking.

usharf 11y ago

Biggest problem with with ads is tracking (privacy). Performance is an issue, but I'm not surprised that opera is making it sound as that's really the problem. Privacy concerns are mentioned briefly. Mozilla aporoach to ad blocking is truly user/consumer oriented, not just a lame attempt to still control and revenu from the whitelisting market.

matthewmacleod 11y ago
That might be the case, but I don't think it is. In my experience, people dislike adverts on the web because they are obtrusive, obnoxious, and slow. Tracking is fairly low down the list of complaints.
bobajeff 11y ago
Pretty sure uBlock Origin doesn't have a whitelisting service or anything. They just do what it is they are supposed to do.
0x0 11y ago
I'd say the biggest problem is malwertising
CaptSpify 11y ago
> Biggest problem with with ads is tracking (privacy) There are a lot of problems with ads. And if you ask 5 people what the biggest one is, your going to get 5 different answers. Rather than point out which one is the "biggest", we should point out which reason we are focusing on.

unicornporn 11y ago

Ironic, considering Opera has their own ad network[1]... [1] http://operamediaworks.com/ http://operamediaworks.com/

outside1234 11y ago
Its only ironic if its blocked as well. Is it?
- agumonkey 11y ago
  The opposite would ethical.
- iza 11y ago
  From the comments: > opera.com is whitelisted by default, but you're free to remove it from the whitelist. There are no hard-coded exceptions to allow Opera or Opera Mediaworks ads through. https://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/03/native-ad-blocking-feature-opera-for-computers/#comment-2561805926 https://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/03/native-ad-blocki...

kup0 11y ago

On a brand new install, there are a bunch of whitelisted sites (news and otherwise) I had to remove manually. I'm curious why they are allowing ads on places like NYTimes by default?

dubcanada 11y ago
Cause people need to make money? Most people don't have a problem with small ads here and there, what people have a problem with is 75 ads on a page with 2 paragraphs of useful content and 17 download buttons that are ads and only one small link with the actual download.
- kup0 11y ago
  Yes, but I should be the one to choose, not Opera. They already have ad blocking turned off by default why make people turn it on twice (switch on, then remove site from whitelist) and why decide FOR me which sites I'm supporting by whitelisting? (Not that I actually do that, but hey some people are nice enough to whitelist so I'm making the argument for them. I block all ads and am fine with businesses going under because of it)

Touche 11y ago

I think people are underestimating how big this is. When Brave did it you could excuse it as the action of a startup looking for attention; Opera now legitimizes ad-blocking as being a feature that should be on by default. This is similar to what went down with pop-up blockers, it quickly became a must-have feature. I wouldn't be surprised if Safari was next and to ship their own content blocker in iOS and have it on by default. The question is, how much will this trend cost Google?

helb 11y ago
> feature that should be on by default "Opera’s ad-blocking feature is deactivated by default."
- Touche 11y ago
  I know, but it does have a popup the first time asking if you want to turn it on. It's a step in the right direction.
xjp251 11y ago
Qihoo(360) will get all your privacy. A notorious and shameless company. Have you ever think about why Qihoo made this dicision?
- alanh 11y ago
  Who is Qihoo? What decision?
  - jmiserez 11y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11177438 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11177438 (14 days ago, 71 comments)
- xjp251 11y ago
  I believe all the website will fight back soon, if opera is detected, then display a message "opera is not supported"

chewyshine 11y ago

Hmmm...Isn't Opera in the process of being taken over by China's Kunlun and Qihoo? With their history, I doubt this will end up being in the users best interest.

jdalgetty 11y ago

Ad blocking is great but we are forgetting that most people will not pay to use a website. Advertisers are going to figure out a away around these things and we'll still end up with ads but at the same time we are going to see many ad supported websites disappear.

mfoy_ 11y ago
Yeah... many great sites are already just labours of love as it is... I mean, I hate crappy clickbait sites as much as the next person... but in our effort to thwart those we're really going to put the squeeze on more honest sites as a side effect.
Grishnakh 11y ago
The advertisers have only themselves to blame for this mess. They've been abusing users for two decades now: pop-ups, pop-unders, flashing ads, auto-play videos, and now serving outright malware. They've utterly refused to take responsibility for their actions, and only blame users for blocking their ads, despite these ads making it nearly impossible to actually view websites (like when closing a pop-up window causes dozens more pop-up windows to appear) and trashing peoples' systems. Now they want us to feel sorry for them? No.
tixocloud 11y ago
I can see sponsored/branded content coming into play.
Jordrok 11y ago
So we should just give up, sit back, and take whatever the ad networks see fit to cram down our throats? No thanks. Also, I wouldn't put so much faith in the ability of advertising companies to completely stop adblocking. Similar things have been tried in the past and failed. (See the Betamax case[1] where home TV recording was challenged). [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Unive....
oconnore 11y ago
This seems like you're assuming the conclusion. When you say, "readers won't pay for sites [and sites cost money]", there are only a few solutions, and they all involve non-readers paying for the reader<->site interaction. As a result, your only solution is hand-wringing about ad blockers, which probably won't result in "advertisers are going to figure out a away around these things", because browsers have complete control over what is displayed. If you don't do this, things get more interesting: - "People won't pay for sites" -> make sites that they will pay for. - "non-readers paying for the reader<->site interaction" -> how can this be consensual, positive? (there are approximately seventy-three people, total, who enjoy web ads. Superbowl doesn't count.) - "[ad supported websites are a good thing]" -> can they be supported publicly? - "ad supported websites disappear" -> maybe in some cases that isn't bad. - "ad supported websites disappear" -> "most people will not pay to use a website" stops being true.

Freestyler_3 11y ago

I didn't minds banner ads and the one or two side bar adds. But then came the between content adds and the clickbait. Also the tracking etc. Sorry, but when adds look more like virusses and some are then I don't want to take the risk. When a website however gives me a warning about my addblocker then I disable it to see how it looks like without addblocker on that website. (I once had a site ask me this and then I got horrible adds with sound and autoplay and loops, that site went back to being blocked very fast)

gorhill 11y ago

Personally I will always be quite uncomfortable when the blocking of ads/tracking/data mining is provided by those with (not necessarily direct) links to the ads/tracking/data mining industry. My view on this is that this is the least worse solution for them to deal with the reality of more and more people using blockers, the worst being the solutions for which the ads/tracking/data mining industry has no say at all -- rather keep some control over none at all.

samfisher83 11y ago

75% of opera revenue in the 4th Q came from ads. I mean it doesn't seem like the best business move.

ianlevesque 11y ago
So don't block their own ads? Admittedly the whole situation is clearly devolving / heating up now. It's going to be interesting.
- samfisher83 11y ago
  I wonder if they do. Maybe someone who uses opera can comment.
  - alanh 11y ago
    Elsewhere in this discussion, an Opera blog moderator was quoted as saying they "do not prioritize their own ad network in any way." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11258292 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11258292

cm3 11y ago

For whatever the default exception list is quite large and clearing it required pressing X for each list entry and the list shrinking in height didn't help because one had to move the mouse cursor around after each delete. Otherwise it seemed to work well. Good on you, Opera!

gorhill 11y ago

Opera 37 dev version is available for linux, so I installed it to perform my own measurements. The example given in Opera's blog post is not very useful, they tested a lightweight page with only one network request blocked. That page loads fast even without a blocker. I preferred testing high-traffic, heavy front pages. The tool to benchmark page load speed is the one I wrote, found at: http://www.raymondhill.net/ublock/pageloadspeed.html http://www.raymondhill.net/ublock/pageloadspeed.html (available on GitHub[1]). Settings: Chrome 50 + uBlock Origin 1.6.4 with default settings. Opera 37 in ad-blocking mode, I did not touch the built-in whitelist. For both browsers, click-to-play was enabled. I disabled the blocking of 3rd-party cookies for both browsers, this is necessary for the page load speed tool to make benchmarked web pages render properly sometimes. For each site benchmarked, I opened a new tab for the page load speed tool. I also tested a web page with nothing to block at all, to test for a case where the CPU cost of the blocking engine can't be offset by the gain of not loading blocked resources. I did not interact with the pages once they loaded, to be sure I benchmarked exactly the same thing. Sometimes merely hovering the mouse over a page can cause javascript code to execute, etc. I didn't want this to happen. From what I could observe, pages looked similar in both browsers, except that there were Taboola ads on Business Insider with Opera, not present with Chrome+uBO (taboola.com is blocked by Peter Lowe's filter list, which is selected by default in uBO). Results: http://cnn.com/ http://cnn.com/ - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 351.65 ms (11/17 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 409.94 ms (11/15 iterations) http://www.washingtonpost.com/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/ - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 933.18 ms (11/14 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 1115.15 ms (11/14 iterations) http://www.businessinsider.com/ http://www.businessinsider.com/ - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 1188.54 ms (11/14 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 1494.69 ms (11/17 iterations) (had clickbait Taboola ads) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page - Chrome 50: Average (valid): 258.51 ms (11/14 iterations) - Opera 37: Average (valid): 281.82 ms (11/12 iterations) Note that if you run your own benchmarks using above tool, you can't compare results with someone else's results, as your connection speed may vary with each computer. The results are comparable for the same computer+site with different browsers, or same browser but different blockers, or same browser same blocker but different blocker settings, etc. [1] https://github.com/gorhill/pageloadspeed https://github.com/gorhill/pageloadspeed

11y ago

codefightclub 11y ago

How are these websites supposed to make money without ads? Most of them rely on ads to stay afloat, and have been denied from adsense. Whats the plan?

sdoering 11y ago
What does give a website the right to include adware or malware and the like into the legitimate UseCase of viwing it? Even if it is just the Ad Network isn't it neglect on the websites part?
- tn13 11y ago
  All ads are not adware malware and ad blockers aren't blocking just the bad ads.
  - xiaoma 11y ago
    Some ads are not malware.