3 ms·

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

by 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.