4 ms·
Another possibility would be to create ad blockers that do that, i.e. block third party javascript but not pure text or images. Then you get the same result, si
by zrm 7y ago
Another possibility would be to create ad blockers that do that, i.e. block third party javascript but not pure text or images. Then you get the same result, simple ads get through but ad scripts don't, so the people who use ads without scripts are the only ones who make money from them.
- galangalalgol 7y agoumatrix does that, but third party is the problem. so many domains put their js on a separate domain. even if they own it.
- SXX 7y agoThere also websites that use CDN like CloudFront and sometimes their subdomains are changing quite often.
- TazeTSchnitzel 7y agoIt's for this sort of reason that I like Privacy Badger. It tries to block tracking and trackers algorithmically, rather than ads per se.
- a1369209993 7y agoSuch a ad blocker already exists; it's called NoScript.
- TheKarateKid 7y agoAd blockers block specific things - NoScript blocks all JS. It’s really not an acceptable alternative.
- klez 7y agoBlocking third party JavaScript will have the unwanted consequence of blocking CDNs as well, so at least you need some whitelist that allows those scripts.
- TylerE 7y agoWhich rather defeats the alleged purpose - you know ever CDN is monetizing your data.
- distances 7y agoI think it's too late for that. I, for one, wouldn't enable even static ads anymore even if my blocker offered the option. The trust is completely lost and would take a long time to rebuild.