4 ms·

I used to want to try and make something that would render ads to a virtual dummy screen, so anything that would check for them would show them as being present

I used to want to try and make something that would render ads to a virtual dummy screen, so anything that would check for them would show them as being present, but no user would see them.

sbarre 4y ago
Speaking for myself only here (but I suspect I'm not alone), I don't use an ad blocker to primarily block visual ads (although it's a nice side effect). I use an ad blocker to block tracking networks and protect my privacy, and one of the end results of that is that visual ads get blocked. So I can't imagine a scenario where I'd need to fake-render the visual ad, since the ad code never has the chance to get that far.
- Zurrrrr 4y ago
  The scenario I was thinking of was a final solution to the cat and mouse game of detecting ad blockers. If the site and js checks and thinks the ad is being displayed but it isn't, that's a win.
  - sbarre 4y ago
    For sure, I actually love this idea in theory, it's super clever. :-) I was just pointing out that it's unlikely we'd be in that scenario, since this approach feels like it would imply letting the ad JS run, but tricking it into thinking that an ad was displayed. Or am I missing something? If I understood correctly, that means the ad's JS would still run in the background and run any included tracking code, which is what I think a lot of people try to prevent with an ad blocker, more than just hiding the visual ad.
    - Zurrrrr 4y ago
      Oh, I see, I think I misunderstood your previous reply - my apologies! And thanks :) My thinking is that the visual and tracking ads are often one and the same. Much tracking is invisible and many ads are well-behaved, but I would say most visual ads are tracking ads also. For me, as much as I care about tracking and stuff, it's been really nice not seeing basically any ads on my web experience for the last 10 years, so I think really I just wanted to attempt to 'end' the cat and mouse game. At least for a while.

I used to want to try and make something that would render ads to a virtual dummy screen, so anything that would check for them would show them as being present, but no user would see them.

sbarre 4y ago

Speaking for myself only here (but I suspect I'm not alone), I don't use an ad blocker to primarily block visual ads (although it's a nice side effect). I use an ad blocker to block tracking networks and protect my privacy, and one of the end results of that is that visual ads get blocked. So I can't imagine a scenario where I'd need to fake-render the visual ad, since the ad code never has the chance to get that far.

Zurrrrr 4y ago
The scenario I was thinking of was a final solution to the cat and mouse game of detecting ad blockers. If the site and js checks and thinks the ad is being displayed but it isn't, that's a win.
- sbarre 4y ago
  For sure, I actually love this idea in theory, it's super clever. :-) I was just pointing out that it's unlikely we'd be in that scenario, since this approach feels like it would imply letting the ad JS run, but tricking it into thinking that an ad was displayed. Or am I missing something? If I understood correctly, that means the ad's JS would still run in the background and run any included tracking code, which is what I think a lot of people try to prevent with an ad blocker, more than just hiding the visual ad.
  - Zurrrrr 4y ago
    Oh, I see, I think I misunderstood your previous reply - my apologies! And thanks :) My thinking is that the visual and tracking ads are often one and the same. Much tracking is invisible and many ads are well-behaved, but I would say most visual ads are tracking ads also. For me, as much as I care about tracking and stuff, it's been really nice not seeing basically any ads on my web experience for the last 10 years, so I think really I just wanted to attempt to 'end' the cat and mouse game. At least for a while.