3 ms·

You don't even have to go that far. You could let ads still be html iframes with text/image/video/audio content. Just no javascript or cookies. (enforcable via

You don't even have to go that far. You could let ads still be html iframes with text/image/video/audio content. Just no javascript or cookies. (enforcable via csp sandbox) And "acceptable ads" policies of blockers could require those properties. They wouldn't even need a fixed whitelist or cooperate with specific companies for that, all they have to do is allow iframes with appropriate CSP rules. I.e. it's a vendor-agnostic approach.

pytyper2 8y ago
They would not get as much telemetry, they also want all the data, it's not just the showing of an ad, it'c collecting everything the internet knows about the user and their pc. The problem is the tracking, collecting and resale of personal data. NOT simply viewing an ad! Ya dig?
- Changee6 8y ago
  Inert, no-cookie ads are the compromise position between total blocking and allowing arbitrary code execution and tracking.
  - pytyper2 8y ago
    Then you can't target the ads to those who most likely will buy, then each impression is worth less in most ad marketplaces. I don't think you will be able to suggest a solution if you ignore the true desires of the buyers and sellers of ads.
    - CharlesColeman 8y ago
      > Then you can't target the ads to those who most likely will buy, then each impression is worth less in most ad marketplaces. I don't think you will be able to suggest a solution if you ignore the true desires of the buyers and sellers of ads. Their desires aren't the only factor in the equation here. If they want to satisfy their desire to have their ads seen at all, they're going to have to sacrifice some of their other desires. If they expect the user make all the sacrifices, then they shouldn't complain when users like me mercilessly block them, encourage others to do so, and do what I can to encourage regulation that would destroy them.
    - the8472 8y ago
      TV and newspaper only supported very granular targeting and the world didn't end despite that. You can still target based on context assuming the embedding site provides that information ahead of time.
- CharlesColeman 8y ago
  > They would not get as much telemetry, they also want all the data, it's not just the showing of an ad, it'c collecting everything the internet knows about the user and their pc. The problem is the tracking, collecting and resale of personal data. NOT simply viewing an ad! Ya dig? As a user, I do not care one iota about advertisers who "want all the data." They can all die in an adblock-fueled fire and I won't shed a tear. Their position of "[we] want all [your] data" is a selfish unwillingness to compromise. However, I'd be willing to compromise with advertisers who agree to live in a sandbox that blocks tracking (but only as long as the page doesn't get too ad-laden).
  - munk-a 8y ago
    Unfortunately a compromise like that could only be reached through enforcement by a third party (probably the government) and in the current political climate that's not going to happen.
    - pytyper2 8y ago
      Oh no don't suggest that.
      - munk-a 8y ago
        Why... not?... It's pretty clear market forces haven't been strong enough to enforce privacy rights in terms of sleazy advertisers? Granted, the internet is pretty new when you look at the scale of history, but I think the role of advertisers in our internet has stabilized at this point, overt malware brings repercussions, user tracking causes privacy advocates to speak out and... the hordes on facebook keep on facebooking.

pytyper2 8y ago

They would not get as much telemetry, they also want all the data, it's not just the showing of an ad, it'c collecting everything the internet knows about the user and their pc. The problem is the tracking, collecting and resale of personal data. NOT simply viewing an ad! Ya dig?

Changee6 8y ago
Inert, no-cookie ads are the compromise position between total blocking and allowing arbitrary code execution and tracking.
- pytyper2 8y ago
  Then you can't target the ads to those who most likely will buy, then each impression is worth less in most ad marketplaces. I don't think you will be able to suggest a solution if you ignore the true desires of the buyers and sellers of ads.
  - CharlesColeman 8y ago
    > Then you can't target the ads to those who most likely will buy, then each impression is worth less in most ad marketplaces. I don't think you will be able to suggest a solution if you ignore the true desires of the buyers and sellers of ads. Their desires aren't the only factor in the equation here. If they want to satisfy their desire to have their ads seen at all, they're going to have to sacrifice some of their other desires. If they expect the user make all the sacrifices, then they shouldn't complain when users like me mercilessly block them, encourage others to do so, and do what I can to encourage regulation that would destroy them.
  - the8472 8y ago
    TV and newspaper only supported very granular targeting and the world didn't end despite that. You can still target based on context assuming the embedding site provides that information ahead of time.
CharlesColeman 8y ago
> They would not get as much telemetry, they also want all the data, it's not just the showing of an ad, it'c collecting everything the internet knows about the user and their pc. The problem is the tracking, collecting and resale of personal data. NOT simply viewing an ad! Ya dig? As a user, I do not care one iota about advertisers who "want all the data." They can all die in an adblock-fueled fire and I won't shed a tear. Their position of "[we] want all [your] data" is a selfish unwillingness to compromise. However, I'd be willing to compromise with advertisers who agree to live in a sandbox that blocks tracking (but only as long as the page doesn't get too ad-laden).
- munk-a 8y ago
  Unfortunately a compromise like that could only be reached through enforcement by a third party (probably the government) and in the current political climate that's not going to happen.
  - pytyper2 8y ago
    Oh no don't suggest that.
    - munk-a 8y ago
      Why... not?... It's pretty clear market forces haven't been strong enough to enforce privacy rights in terms of sleazy advertisers? Granted, the internet is pretty new when you look at the scale of history, but I think the role of advertisers in our internet has stabilized at this point, overt malware brings repercussions, user tracking causes privacy advocates to speak out and... the hordes on facebook keep on facebooking.