4 ms·

so why aren't they built in to all browsers by now? many have pop up blockers and that was for the same reason, the ruin of the browsing experience

amelius 10y ago
More and more publishing websites now block you when you run an ad blocker :/ Ad blockers have to become smarter first. For example, by making the displayed DOM different from the DOM seen by the browser (and JS).
- emmab 10y ago
  This would break e.g. mouseover events. Ultimately the only foolproof way is obscuring the ads but leaving the space they take up on the screen blank. A "stealth mode" button on my adblocker that did this that's automatically already enabled for websites that are regularly blocking it would be very useful.
  - amelius 10y ago
    > This would break e.g. mouseover events. Not if these are generated only from the DOM seen by the browser.
- davidgerard 10y ago
  What actually useful sites block ad-blocker users? (I'm not counting Forbes' blog posts as useful.)
TeMPOraL 10y ago
Because the first browser to introduce ad block would get banned by major publishers and people would stop using it. This would have to be a simultaneous deployment by all major browser vendors. The best they can do on their own is things like Reader Mode in Firefox - obviously there to cut down on the amount of shit on-line, but not strong enough to make the "important people" angry. Also keep in mind that the Internet That Matters now is the commercial, ad-backed one. Even standardization bodies have serious conflicts of interest now, and the changes are about enabling businesses to make money, not about making the Internet a better / more useful thing for humanity in general.
- pdkl95 10y ago
  > would get banned Reason #57 betraying the user agent in the referrer is a terrible idea.
- rplnt 10y ago
  Opera has built-in adblocker (with filters).
  - danielbln 10y ago
    Opera has a market share of <2%.
    - rplnt 10y ago
      Depends on the market. 7% in Poland (and that's not their top market). Still quite a lot considering the "Opera" doesn't exist anymore (since 2012?) and what is now Opera is actually a branded Chromium with some extra features.
CookieMon 10y ago
Brave Browser has all that build in, and Firefox is heading there with tracking ads now automatically blocked in private browsing windows, but those browsers have the user's back - I imagine Chrome has Google's back and Google is about advertising. Brave is promising a way for users to microtip sites they visit automatically, to make up for the lost ad revenue, so that will be an interesting experiment. Browsers need this stuff built in pronto, because non-tech people have no chance of knowing the 4 or so plugins you currently need to install to browse safely.
- lucb1e 10y ago
  Opera and K-Meleon also have it built in. Like you said, browsers not in advertiser's pockets.
  - rplnt 10y ago
    They are of course. Which is why Opera's built-in ad blocker display's Google's ads by default. So the advertisers that pay browser vendors actually benefit.
gcb0 10y ago
They are. Disguised as "reader mode". Microsoft tried to enable "do not track" by default and the whole advertising industry went nuts. That's why everyone is afraid now. Apple started to move slowly on it by enabling ad blockers on IOS to even exist. Google have too much skin in the game, but they are not afraid of hurting their competition, they implemented flash and video ad blocker in recent chrome (and chromium, where they also rein) everywhere but not on youtube! (the blocker is not as obvious as to trigger when url != youtube, but they crafted the rules that it just so fit youtube one. anyway, everyone is moving slowly, because microsoft was clever and fast to make a calculated mistake that show what will happen to anyone that tries.
- kapep 10y ago
  "Microsoft tried to enable "do not track" by default and the whole advertising industry went nuts." Did they? I thought the advertising industry didn't care about this feature or it's default setting at all, since they just ignore it anyway. It was privacy-conscious people who didn't like the activated-by-default setting. Because in the rare case some service actually did respect that feature, they most likely would choose to ignore it for all IE users, because in most cases it wasn't the users active choice.
  - gcb0 10y ago
    yeah. pretty much every ad nerwork blatantly ignores it nowadays. They rushed to disable it when microsoft pulled that. enable it and visit amazon. See if their network will or will not show you tons of ads of what you just saw there.
adav 10y ago
Because the advertising industry pays browser makers: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/041315/how-mozilla-firefox-and-google-chrome-make-money.asp http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/041315/how-mo... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-22/google-paid-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-22/google-pai...
breakingcups 10y ago
Well, I doubt it'll ever be all browsers because the biggest browser in the world is owned by an advertising company.

amelius 10y ago

More and more publishing websites now block you when you run an ad blocker :/ Ad blockers have to become smarter first. For example, by making the displayed DOM different from the DOM seen by the browser (and JS).

emmab 10y ago
This would break e.g. mouseover events. Ultimately the only foolproof way is obscuring the ads but leaving the space they take up on the screen blank. A "stealth mode" button on my adblocker that did this that's automatically already enabled for websites that are regularly blocking it would be very useful.
- amelius 10y ago
  > This would break e.g. mouseover events. Not if these are generated only from the DOM seen by the browser.
davidgerard 10y ago
What actually useful sites block ad-blocker users? (I'm not counting Forbes' blog posts as useful.)

TeMPOraL 10y ago

Because the first browser to introduce ad block would get banned by major publishers and people would stop using it. This would have to be a simultaneous deployment by all major browser vendors. The best they can do on their own is things like Reader Mode in Firefox - obviously there to cut down on the amount of shit on-line, but not strong enough to make the "important people" angry. Also keep in mind that the Internet That Matters now is the commercial, ad-backed one. Even standardization bodies have serious conflicts of interest now, and the changes are about enabling businesses to make money, not about making the Internet a better / more useful thing for humanity in general.

pdkl95 10y ago
> would get banned Reason #57 betraying the user agent in the referrer is a terrible idea.
rplnt 10y ago
Opera has built-in adblocker (with filters).
- danielbln 10y ago
  Opera has a market share of <2%.
  - rplnt 10y ago
    Depends on the market. 7% in Poland (and that's not their top market). Still quite a lot considering the "Opera" doesn't exist anymore (since 2012?) and what is now Opera is actually a branded Chromium with some extra features.

CookieMon 10y ago

Brave Browser has all that build in, and Firefox is heading there with tracking ads now automatically blocked in private browsing windows, but those browsers have the user's back - I imagine Chrome has Google's back and Google is about advertising. Brave is promising a way for users to microtip sites they visit automatically, to make up for the lost ad revenue, so that will be an interesting experiment. Browsers need this stuff built in pronto, because non-tech people have no chance of knowing the 4 or so plugins you currently need to install to browse safely.

lucb1e 10y ago
Opera and K-Meleon also have it built in. Like you said, browsers not in advertiser's pockets.
- rplnt 10y ago
  They are of course. Which is why Opera's built-in ad blocker display's Google's ads by default. So the advertisers that pay browser vendors actually benefit.

gcb0 10y ago

They are. Disguised as "reader mode". Microsoft tried to enable "do not track" by default and the whole advertising industry went nuts. That's why everyone is afraid now. Apple started to move slowly on it by enabling ad blockers on IOS to even exist. Google have too much skin in the game, but they are not afraid of hurting their competition, they implemented flash and video ad blocker in recent chrome (and chromium, where they also rein) everywhere but not on youtube! (the blocker is not as obvious as to trigger when url != youtube, but they crafted the rules that it just so fit youtube one. anyway, everyone is moving slowly, because microsoft was clever and fast to make a calculated mistake that show what will happen to anyone that tries.

kapep 10y ago
"Microsoft tried to enable "do not track" by default and the whole advertising industry went nuts." Did they? I thought the advertising industry didn't care about this feature or it's default setting at all, since they just ignore it anyway. It was privacy-conscious people who didn't like the activated-by-default setting. Because in the rare case some service actually did respect that feature, they most likely would choose to ignore it for all IE users, because in most cases it wasn't the users active choice.
- gcb0 10y ago
  yeah. pretty much every ad nerwork blatantly ignores it nowadays. They rushed to disable it when microsoft pulled that. enable it and visit amazon. See if their network will or will not show you tons of ads of what you just saw there.

adav 10y ago

Because the advertising industry pays browser makers: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/041315/how-mozilla-firefox-and-google-chrome-make-money.asp http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/041315/how-mo... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-22/google-paid-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-22/google-pai...

breakingcups 10y ago

Well, I doubt it'll ever be all browsers because the biggest browser in the world is owned by an advertising company.