3 ms·
> Another technique used to hide the ad blockers' activities is even more impressive. They are able to "create two copies of the page, one which the user sees (
by devy 10y ago
> Another technique used to hide the ad blockers' activities is even more impressive. They are able to "create two copies of the page, one which the user sees (and to which ad-blocking will be applied) and one which the publisher code interacts with, and to ensure that information propagates between these copies in one direction but not the other."
So this ultimate ad-blocker would potentially consume twice as much resources as it would have been?
- nickbail3y 10y agoThis was my question as well.
- randomwalker 10y agoCoauthor of the paper here. No --- this is not one of the three techniques that we implemented. It was a hypothetical suggestion for future work. Unfortunate that the article didn't make that clear. Here is the paper http://randomwalker.info/publications/ad-blocking-framework-techniques.pdf http://randomwalker.info/publications/ad-blocking-framework-... Here is our blog post about it: https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2017/04/14/the-future-of-ad-blocking/ https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2017/04/14/the-future-of-ad-bl...
- ktta 10y agoLooks like you've accidentally repasted the paper URL for the blog post
- randomwalker 10y agoOops! Thanks, fixed.
- wernercd 10y agoJust a throw out question: One of the biggest issues (IMO) is the security threat... if there is a second copy that "we" don't see, doesn't that mean that the second copy can do "bad things" still? Case in Point: Forbes requests you disable ad-blocker... then serves pop-under malware: http://www.networkworld.com/article/3021113/security/forbes-malware-ad-blocker-advertisements.html http://www.networkworld.com/article/3021113/security/forbes-... I could stomach ads - just like I stomached commercials on TV shows... you get used to them and they become white noise... if the ads were unobtrusive and non-invasive (IE: Google Search Results)... it's full screen, pop-up/under, audio, video, etc. Then throw on top of that malware... What's to stop the malware from biting on that second copy?
- unholythree 10y agoThis is what matters most to me. My dislike of ads are out of fear of malicious code first, tracking second, and wasting my bandwidth third. The simple gif banner ads of yore were tolerable enough.
- bigbugbag 9y agoNeuromarketing proved that they do not become white noise, you just stop consciously noticing them and how they affect you[1]. But even if you somehow developed some kind of immunity, you'd still be affected by ads because advertising costs are factored in product prices, when you buy something even if you never seen any of the ads for this product, you're still paying for them. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromarketing#Study_examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromarketing#Study_examples
- cprayingmantis 10y agoHere's what probably amounts to a dumb question why couldn't we just have an AI act like a real person and click on some of the ads that it deemed 'safe' and in a separate sandbox type browser instance? This would reduce the negative effects of adblockers on content publishers.
- abiox 10y agoi'd wager that it would take a substantial refactor of layout and rendering code to avoid significantly increased resource usage while also preventing sketchy ad code from being able to detect that it's being blocked.
- RUG3Y 10y agoMaybe. We already have front-end libraries that are maintaining a "virtual dom".