10 ms·

Full disclosure: I wrote this post. I'm sure a lot of us here have already embraced uBlock Origin. It seems to be universally acclaimed on most tech forums. B

Full disclosure: I wrote this post. I'm sure a lot of us here have already embraced uBlock Origin. It seems to be universally acclaimed on most tech forums. Before I wrote this post, I wasn't aware that eyeo served ads directly, which is what prompted me to write it.

kerng 8y ago
uBlock Origin is great, I have been using it on both desktop and mobile for a while. I wish it would be there by default in Firefox and also other browsers!
mey 8y ago
EFF Privacy Badger combined with uBlock Origin is my current combination.
- gruez 8y ago
  what does privacy badger do that can't be accomplished with a custom ublock list?
  - davidfischer 8y ago
    I ran Privacy Badger for a while. It is very good for finding out who is setting 3rd party cookies or using alternatives to cookies (eg. localstorage with unique identifiers). Rather than using a list, my understanding is it uses heuristics based on what cookies are set, whether they are 1st vs 3rd party, their expiry time and the like.
  - zenhack 8y ago
    Mostly automation -- you don't have to actually craft the list. It will just spot stuff it thinks it should be blocking and do so. And if you need to correct it (uncommon in my experience) the UI for doing so is right there next to the address bar. Also, it's capable of just blocking cookies for some sites, which is nice when they're hosting common J's libs/fonts or something, and blocking them outright would break the page.
  - phicoh 8y ago
    The good thing about privacy badger is that you don't have to care about the contents of ads ('acceptable ads') or how much you like a particular site ('please unblock us in your ad-blocker). If a site has parts with 3rd party tracking cookies then I just don't see it. The downside of only using privacy badger is that you do see some ads. At the moment I find that level of ads acceptable.
- early 8y ago
  Privacy Badger is not an adblocker. It block sites that track you by some magic heuristic. It just happen to be that ads are really intrusive. Every time I see a "please whitelist or page in your ad blocker", I get a smug smile on my face, because I do not have one
- TheRealPomax 8y ago
  It's a great combo, although as a developer it's also a constant source of "why the fuck does this website I'm working on not work" because privacybadger is the most aggressive cookie destroyer on the planet.
- MandieD 8y ago
  They work well enough together that I set up any new PC for friends and family with them, after giving them a non-admin account.
BRAlNlAC 8y ago
Interested why you chose to focus solely on uBlock Origin as an alternative instead of something more forward thinking like AdNauseum?
- hendersoon 8y ago
  AdNauseum essentially defrauds advertising networks. That is not the righteous path. "Acceptable ads" allowed by default (opt-out) are inherently and OBVIOUSLY the right idea, but the acceptable ad list should be maintained by a disinterested party, not an advertiser or ad agency. Problem is that disinterested parties are just that-- nobody cares enough to do it. Who wants to go to that effort to _allow_ ads? One solution would be for Google and other large advertisers to fund a not-for-profit company to build acceptable ad lists, and then convince adblock addon developers to enable the lists by default through sheer benevolence. Enforcement is easy, if they play games like AdBlock and start allowing intrusive ads, Gorhill (uBlock Origin developer) and those like him will instantly disable the lists and their entire model falls apart.
  - trophycase 8y ago
    Sorry, but there's no such thing as acceptable brainwash.
  - JoshTriplett 8y ago
    > "Acceptable ads" allowed by default are inherently and OBVIOUSLY the right idea I think you're overestimating how universal that opinion might be, and underestimating how many people don't want any ads.
    - hendersoon 8y ago
      Not at all, I'm one of those people! It's opt-out. We can simply uncheck a box to block the acceptable ads too. I edited my original post to make that clear, I thought "allowed by default" was sufficient but several people had the same reaction.
      - 8y ago
davidfischer 8y ago
> Before I wrote this post, I wasn't aware that eyeo served ads directly, which is what prompted me to write it. I think they floated this idea but ended up nixing it after users weren't happy. I run ABP with "acceptable ads w/o 3rd party tracking" a subset of the acceptable ads list and have for the last couple years. I've never seen an ad they injected or I wasn't aware they injected it. The ad-supported site I work on and who employs me was added to the acceptable ads list today. I'm not affiliated with eyeo in any other way. We did not have to pay them (yet?).
kodablah 8y ago
Glaring omission that is built in to Chrome: https://www.betterads.org https://www.betterads.org. one might hope it's not as much of a racket, but the conflict of interest exists.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 8y ago
  This is just my personal opinion, but I find that it only removes the worst of the worst though, and I find it dishonest. For example, they ban auto-playing video ads, but > The Better Ads Methodology has not yet tested video ads that appear before (“pre-roll”) or during (“mid-roll”) video content that is relevant to the content of the page itself. So shitty news web sites that put one of those "we put a useless video here so we can show video ads" videos on their page can still continue using auto-playing video ads, with sound, and I'm pretty sure they'll find some way to define Youtube's pre-roll ads as "totally not a banned prestitial with countdown". Also, just saw Taboola on their web site - their ads certainly meet the technical standards, but are one of the most obnoxious ones on the Internet, and the cause for many to disable the "acceptable ads" program/switch to uBlock. They're just trying to take the worst edge off to reduce the necessity to install an adblocker, or, if you want to interpret it uncharitably, maximize the amount of people who get to see the bad-but-not-absolutely-horrifying ad formats. It's way too little way too late.
  - kodablah 8y ago
    If you're curious, I keep a list updated a few times a day at https://github.com/cretz/badads https://github.com/cretz/badads
rever 8y ago
One heads up and kind of a correction, for users that want to stick to Safari on iOS (myself being one of them) after installing Firefox Focus on iOS, go to iOS Settings -> Safari -> General section "Content Blockers" and toggle on for "Firefox Focus" Then ad blocking is on (:
- briandear 8y ago
  You can also use Crystal.
  - zjs 8y ago
    From the article, Crystal also participates in eyeo's Acceptable Ads program.
coretx 8y ago
Although uBlock does a fine job at fighting most symptoms,AdNauseam ( banned by google. )does a better job at fighting the cause by clicking on ads in the background, providing some financial incentives to advertisers. To fight back and undermine value & business models seems more effective than just docile ad-blocking. Link: https://adnauseam.io/ https://adnauseam.io/
- touristtam 8y ago
  It would be useful if it was registering a click as a generic user without means to identify you personally. I don't see this on their landing page.
kenning 8y ago
As a stupid and impatient person, I didn't get to the end of the article the first time i looked at it. After I saw you wrote it I went back to check if you mentioned ublock by name. You might want to have something below the header and above the lede that says "hey just before we go any further, the solution is to use ublock origin instead of adblock." And even better, a big image of adblock with another, bigger red "no" symbol over it (in addition to the one that's already in the logo i guess) and then a check mark next to ublock origin. Like I said, I'm stupid. It's an interesting article but i already knew adblock plus was sketchy so I didn't finish.

kerng 8y ago

uBlock Origin is great, I have been using it on both desktop and mobile for a while. I wish it would be there by default in Firefox and also other browsers!

mey 8y ago

EFF Privacy Badger combined with uBlock Origin is my current combination.

gruez 8y ago
what does privacy badger do that can't be accomplished with a custom ublock list?
- davidfischer 8y ago
  I ran Privacy Badger for a while. It is very good for finding out who is setting 3rd party cookies or using alternatives to cookies (eg. localstorage with unique identifiers). Rather than using a list, my understanding is it uses heuristics based on what cookies are set, whether they are 1st vs 3rd party, their expiry time and the like.
- zenhack 8y ago
  Mostly automation -- you don't have to actually craft the list. It will just spot stuff it thinks it should be blocking and do so. And if you need to correct it (uncommon in my experience) the UI for doing so is right there next to the address bar. Also, it's capable of just blocking cookies for some sites, which is nice when they're hosting common J's libs/fonts or something, and blocking them outright would break the page.
- phicoh 8y ago
  The good thing about privacy badger is that you don't have to care about the contents of ads ('acceptable ads') or how much you like a particular site ('please unblock us in your ad-blocker). If a site has parts with 3rd party tracking cookies then I just don't see it. The downside of only using privacy badger is that you do see some ads. At the moment I find that level of ads acceptable.
early 8y ago
Privacy Badger is not an adblocker. It block sites that track you by some magic heuristic. It just happen to be that ads are really intrusive. Every time I see a "please whitelist or page in your ad blocker", I get a smug smile on my face, because I do not have one
TheRealPomax 8y ago
It's a great combo, although as a developer it's also a constant source of "why the fuck does this website I'm working on not work" because privacybadger is the most aggressive cookie destroyer on the planet.
MandieD 8y ago
They work well enough together that I set up any new PC for friends and family with them, after giving them a non-admin account.

BRAlNlAC 8y ago

Interested why you chose to focus solely on uBlock Origin as an alternative instead of something more forward thinking like AdNauseum?

hendersoon 8y ago
AdNauseum essentially defrauds advertising networks. That is not the righteous path. "Acceptable ads" allowed by default (opt-out) are inherently and OBVIOUSLY the right idea, but the acceptable ad list should be maintained by a disinterested party, not an advertiser or ad agency. Problem is that disinterested parties are just that-- nobody cares enough to do it. Who wants to go to that effort to _allow_ ads? One solution would be for Google and other large advertisers to fund a not-for-profit company to build acceptable ad lists, and then convince adblock addon developers to enable the lists by default through sheer benevolence. Enforcement is easy, if they play games like AdBlock and start allowing intrusive ads, Gorhill (uBlock Origin developer) and those like him will instantly disable the lists and their entire model falls apart.
- trophycase 8y ago
  Sorry, but there's no such thing as acceptable brainwash.
- JoshTriplett 8y ago
  > "Acceptable ads" allowed by default are inherently and OBVIOUSLY the right idea I think you're overestimating how universal that opinion might be, and underestimating how many people don't want any ads.
  - hendersoon 8y ago
    Not at all, I'm one of those people! It's opt-out. We can simply uncheck a box to block the acceptable ads too. I edited my original post to make that clear, I thought "allowed by default" was sufficient but several people had the same reaction.
    - 8y ago

davidfischer 8y ago

> Before I wrote this post, I wasn't aware that eyeo served ads directly, which is what prompted me to write it. I think they floated this idea but ended up nixing it after users weren't happy. I run ABP with "acceptable ads w/o 3rd party tracking" a subset of the acceptable ads list and have for the last couple years. I've never seen an ad they injected or I wasn't aware they injected it. The ad-supported site I work on and who employs me was added to the acceptable ads list today. I'm not affiliated with eyeo in any other way. We did not have to pay them (yet?).

kodablah 8y ago

Glaring omission that is built in to Chrome: https://www.betterads.org https://www.betterads.org. one might hope it's not as much of a racket, but the conflict of interest exists.

tgsovlerkhgsel 8y ago
This is just my personal opinion, but I find that it only removes the worst of the worst though, and I find it dishonest. For example, they ban auto-playing video ads, but > The Better Ads Methodology has not yet tested video ads that appear before (“pre-roll”) or during (“mid-roll”) video content that is relevant to the content of the page itself. So shitty news web sites that put one of those "we put a useless video here so we can show video ads" videos on their page can still continue using auto-playing video ads, with sound, and I'm pretty sure they'll find some way to define Youtube's pre-roll ads as "totally not a banned prestitial with countdown". Also, just saw Taboola on their web site - their ads certainly meet the technical standards, but are one of the most obnoxious ones on the Internet, and the cause for many to disable the "acceptable ads" program/switch to uBlock. They're just trying to take the worst edge off to reduce the necessity to install an adblocker, or, if you want to interpret it uncharitably, maximize the amount of people who get to see the bad-but-not-absolutely-horrifying ad formats. It's way too little way too late.
- kodablah 8y ago
  If you're curious, I keep a list updated a few times a day at https://github.com/cretz/badads https://github.com/cretz/badads

rever 8y ago

One heads up and kind of a correction, for users that want to stick to Safari on iOS (myself being one of them) after installing Firefox Focus on iOS, go to iOS Settings -> Safari -> General section "Content Blockers" and toggle on for "Firefox Focus" Then ad blocking is on (:

briandear 8y ago
You can also use Crystal.
- zjs 8y ago
  From the article, Crystal also participates in eyeo's Acceptable Ads program.

coretx 8y ago

Although uBlock does a fine job at fighting most symptoms,AdNauseam ( banned by google. )does a better job at fighting the cause by clicking on ads in the background, providing some financial incentives to advertisers. To fight back and undermine value & business models seems more effective than just docile ad-blocking. Link: https://adnauseam.io/ https://adnauseam.io/

touristtam 8y ago
It would be useful if it was registering a click as a generic user without means to identify you personally. I don't see this on their landing page.

kenning 8y ago

As a stupid and impatient person, I didn't get to the end of the article the first time i looked at it. After I saw you wrote it I went back to check if you mentioned ublock by name. You might want to have something below the header and above the lede that says "hey just before we go any further, the solution is to use ublock origin instead of adblock." And even better, a big image of adblock with another, bigger red "no" symbol over it (in addition to the one that's already in the logo i guess) and then a check mark next to ublock origin. Like I said, I'm stupid. It's an interesting article but i already knew adblock plus was sketchy so I didn't finish.