4 ms·

This page was loading so many trackers for a full minute (doubleclick, openx, google.ca???) that my laptop started heating up. I'll wait for another media sourc

by kl4m 6y ago

This page was loading so many trackers for a full minute (doubleclick, openx, google.ca???) that my laptop started heating up. I'll wait for another media source to read about it, thanks.

Alupis 6y ago
Or, use an Ad Blocker if you're so averse to this website making money off their content?
- aeurielesn 6y ago
  > this website making money off their content That's an interesting wording. I would say it's making money off your data than their content. In other situations, we'd normally call this doxing.
  - Alupis 6y ago
    > In other situations, we'd normally call this doxing No we wouldn't. If you're going to complain about ads, but still want the content, then shutup and pay the website for it. You're not going to do that either, though. Want to have your cake and eat it too? No, instead (generic) you just wants free content. (Generic) you isn't going to pay $12.99 monthly per website to support the content and operation costs. (Generic) you just wants free stuff. How many people on HN complain about Paywalled websites and immediately seek ways to circumvent the paywall? Paywalls are the alternative. There's real costs with running a website - even more-so with producing content people are interested in (clearly evidenced by front page of HN). Or, just use an Ad Blocker and be on with your day. It's the complaining that's annoying - and petty. Solutions to your perceived problem are super easy and well within reach. It's literally 3 clicks to install uBlock Origin.
    - aeurielesn 6y ago
      > then shutup You aren't new here. Whatever you said, I stopped reading here.
      - Alupis 6y ago
        I suppose that's fine, because you'd owe me $0.35 if you want to continue reading my content. ;)
    - UweSchmidt 6y ago
      The problem is systematic: There is currently no realistic way to pay and be done with the medium; there is no spotify or netflix for websites. Those services kinda prove that people are willing to pay after a decade of torrenting and burning DVDs. HN readers typically know how to deal with ad blockers, our less technical fellows don't, and we ultimately owe them to work against this bullshit, like we expect them to steer their respective fields and professions to the common benefit, that they make their products and services healthy and safe. A computer literally heating up due to who knows what arbitrary javascript is executed on that person's computer is notable, and the advertising-tech-complex is very much on topic for HN. Finally, there can be NO DEAL between a website visitor and a bunch of third party javascript that cannot be understood or audited, and if the operation is not profitable, tough. There were cool websites on the internet before ads and we will have websites in the future.
      - Alupis 6y ago
        > there is no spotify or netflix for websites. Those services kinda prove that people are willing to pay The overwhelming majority of Spotify accounts are Free Accounts, supported by... you guessed it... Ads. People don't torrent music because Spotify is easier. Spotify earns money through advertisers paying them to advertise on their platform. Spotify pays part of that to artists who put music on their platform. Everyone is getting paid, and it costs the user nothing. That's why Spotify is so popular. > There were cool websites on the internet before ads and we will have websites in the future What is it your are arguing for? Charging $0.35 per every single page view? Or people running websites should just foot the bill out of the goodness of their hearts? Someone has to pay the hosting bill... Some of the tech-elites on HN will pay this out of principle, but the overwhelming majority of people will not. Be realistic. A world where you must pay for every page view is effectively antithetical to everything the web stood for. The _free_ distributions of knowledge to everyone simply would cease to exist. It's actually amazingly clever. We've tricked 3rd party advertisers into footing the bill for literally _everything_ on the internet. You are free to consume content without paying a single penny - someone else is paying it for you. The trade? You gotta look at some ads once in a while. Oh the humanity! If someone is this principled - they should run an Ad Blocker. Most people simply don't care. You can make a case that they should care, but then you'll need to come with with a robust system to pay content creators to ensure they aren't buried in expenses of running a website for a bunch of freeloaders.
- rch 6y ago
  Why is it more appropriate to actively subvert a content provider's ability to monetize while still consuming their product?
  - Keyframe 6y ago
    It’s one thing to show an ad, and it’s a completely other thing to go around the internet and unmaks my behaviour and identity in order to profile me in order to show me ads AND store data about me. The thing is, I don’t know whether site will do that or “just show an ad” before I go there, so it’s not active subversion, it’s an active defense against downright shady business. Show me an ad - fine. Go out and profile me - fuck you.
- csours 6y ago
  I don't mind ads per se, I mind intrusive ads that use more data and system resources than the content.
- kohtatsu 6y ago
  They didn't mention anything about ads, just trackers that bogged down their PC.
  - miles 6y ago
    Good adblockers (like uBlock Origin) offer tracking protection as well[0]: "Out of the box, these lists of filters are loaded and enforced: - EasyList (ads) - EasyPrivacy (tracking) - Peter Lowe’s Ad server list (ads and tracking) - Malware domains" [0] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpa...

by kl4m 6y ago

This page was loading so many trackers for a full minute (doubleclick, openx, google.ca???) that my laptop started heating up. I'll wait for another media source to read about it, thanks.

Alupis 6y ago

Or, use an Ad Blocker if you're so averse to this website making money off their content?

aeurielesn 6y ago
> this website making money off their content That's an interesting wording. I would say it's making money off your data than their content. In other situations, we'd normally call this doxing.
- Alupis 6y ago
  > In other situations, we'd normally call this doxing No we wouldn't. If you're going to complain about ads, but still want the content, then shutup and pay the website for it. You're not going to do that either, though. Want to have your cake and eat it too? No, instead (generic) you just wants free content. (Generic) you isn't going to pay $12.99 monthly per website to support the content and operation costs. (Generic) you just wants free stuff. How many people on HN complain about Paywalled websites and immediately seek ways to circumvent the paywall? Paywalls are the alternative. There's real costs with running a website - even more-so with producing content people are interested in (clearly evidenced by front page of HN). Or, just use an Ad Blocker and be on with your day. It's the complaining that's annoying - and petty. Solutions to your perceived problem are super easy and well within reach. It's literally 3 clicks to install uBlock Origin.
  - aeurielesn 6y ago
    > then shutup You aren't new here. Whatever you said, I stopped reading here.
    - Alupis 6y ago
      I suppose that's fine, because you'd owe me $0.35 if you want to continue reading my content. ;)
  - UweSchmidt 6y ago
    The problem is systematic: There is currently no realistic way to pay and be done with the medium; there is no spotify or netflix for websites. Those services kinda prove that people are willing to pay after a decade of torrenting and burning DVDs. HN readers typically know how to deal with ad blockers, our less technical fellows don't, and we ultimately owe them to work against this bullshit, like we expect them to steer their respective fields and professions to the common benefit, that they make their products and services healthy and safe. A computer literally heating up due to who knows what arbitrary javascript is executed on that person's computer is notable, and the advertising-tech-complex is very much on topic for HN. Finally, there can be NO DEAL between a website visitor and a bunch of third party javascript that cannot be understood or audited, and if the operation is not profitable, tough. There were cool websites on the internet before ads and we will have websites in the future.
    - Alupis 6y ago
      > there is no spotify or netflix for websites. Those services kinda prove that people are willing to pay The overwhelming majority of Spotify accounts are Free Accounts, supported by... you guessed it... Ads. People don't torrent music because Spotify is easier. Spotify earns money through advertisers paying them to advertise on their platform. Spotify pays part of that to artists who put music on their platform. Everyone is getting paid, and it costs the user nothing. That's why Spotify is so popular. > There were cool websites on the internet before ads and we will have websites in the future What is it your are arguing for? Charging $0.35 per every single page view? Or people running websites should just foot the bill out of the goodness of their hearts? Someone has to pay the hosting bill... Some of the tech-elites on HN will pay this out of principle, but the overwhelming majority of people will not. Be realistic. A world where you must pay for every page view is effectively antithetical to everything the web stood for. The _free_ distributions of knowledge to everyone simply would cease to exist. It's actually amazingly clever. We've tricked 3rd party advertisers into footing the bill for literally _everything_ on the internet. You are free to consume content without paying a single penny - someone else is paying it for you. The trade? You gotta look at some ads once in a while. Oh the humanity! If someone is this principled - they should run an Ad Blocker. Most people simply don't care. You can make a case that they should care, but then you'll need to come with with a robust system to pay content creators to ensure they aren't buried in expenses of running a website for a bunch of freeloaders.
rch 6y ago
Why is it more appropriate to actively subvert a content provider's ability to monetize while still consuming their product?
- Keyframe 6y ago
  It’s one thing to show an ad, and it’s a completely other thing to go around the internet and unmaks my behaviour and identity in order to profile me in order to show me ads AND store data about me. The thing is, I don’t know whether site will do that or “just show an ad” before I go there, so it’s not active subversion, it’s an active defense against downright shady business. Show me an ad - fine. Go out and profile me - fuck you.
csours 6y ago
I don't mind ads per se, I mind intrusive ads that use more data and system resources than the content.
kohtatsu 6y ago
They didn't mention anything about ads, just trackers that bogged down their PC.
- miles 6y ago
  Good adblockers (like uBlock Origin) offer tracking protection as well[0]: "Out of the box, these lists of filters are loaded and enforced: - EasyList (ads) - EasyPrivacy (tracking) - Peter Lowe’s Ad server list (ads and tracking) - Malware domains" [0] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpa...