3 ms·
I think one of the reason larger companies like them is because they may end ad blockers once and for all. You can read a discussion about some of the issues t
by aclelland 6y ago
I think one of the reason larger companies like them is because they may end ad blockers once and for all.
You can read a discussion about some of the issues that it causes here - https://github.com/WICG/webpackage/issues/551 https://github.com/WICG/webpackage/issues/551
Of course, the Brave browser also have some concerns about it - https://brave.com/webbundles-harmful-to-content-blocking-security-tools-and-the-open-web/ https://brave.com/webbundles-harmful-to-content-blocking-sec...
- rektide 6y agoWidely disputed. If this really did prevent ad blocking no one would expect it to ship. Inside the bundle are the same resources as without a bundle.
- spankalee 6y agoSame resources with the same URLs, access with the same request/response pipeline that's just as visible to blockers. If you can change URLs in the bundle, you can change them outside the bundle. UAs are also completely free to request a resource from the URL rather than the bundle.
- notatoad 6y agoPeople have been saying "AMP prevents adblockers" since the introduction of AMP, and it has never been true. Advertisers don't want to bundle their ads with the content, they can't make any money that way. they want their ads to be dynamically requested each time they are drawn so they can sell ads based on real-time conditions. A standards-based implementation of AMP won't change this. Brave's assertion that "bundles are like PDF" is actually a pretty good analogy - you don't see a whole lot of ad networks popping up trying to sell ad space in PDFs, do you?