5 ms·

As soon as you open the site in Chrome it complains that my browser is stalking me (I know and don't care) and that this site does not work with it. So I closed

by harel 3y ago

As soon as you open the site in Chrome it complains that my browser is stalking me (I know and don't care) and that this site does not work with it. So I closed it. More annoying than my browser's stalking habits is the assumption that one knows best and can decide for others what they should be using. This is the first time I see something like that. Hope it's the last too.

Boatfaceing 3y ago
[dead]
paulpauper 3y ago
same here. and no option to close it. is this some sort of joke or someting
account42 3y ago
Enjoy you advertiser-driven web.
- harel 3y ago
  This won't stop an advertiser driven web. Only an alternative approach that maintain provider profits. Adverts exist because we refuse to pay for every service. This doesn't offer an alternative, but presumes to know better by removing user's choice.
  - tristan957 3y ago
    If people listened to the author of the web page, it would stop an ad-driven web. Because the world continues to use Chromium skins, we are inevitably going to get some technology that ad blockers won't work on any more. See FLoC, Web Bundles, or Web Integrity. How do you all use a browser that comes up with these adversarial technologies?
    - harel 3y ago
      Because on a daily basis, it doesn't affect me. Personally. I don't care. That's the honest answer. On days I do care, I have my means to be undetected. When the ads bother me, I switch on the pihole. Some sites don't work with pihole enabled so sometimes it's either off or I create exceptions. But I like Chrome. The convenience I get from chrome is invaluable to me. No other browser can give me that exactly. But all of the above are based on MY decisions. I chose to use X or to ignore Y. When a site decides that for me, well... I just walk away.
      - account42 3y ago
        I too do not care about the environment because a litle polltion won't make a difference. And I don't bother with a retirement fund because I make enough money for my needs right now so why care about the future.
        harel 3y ago
        These are bad analogies. I can block ads on the net and still use chrome. I can choose whether ads bother me or not. I can choose if I want/agree to be tracked. My choice doesn't hurt anyone. You want to fight the ads - take on the ad networks. Provide an alternative. Without an alternative it's just a cardboard sign with some text.
        tristan957 3y ago
        If you emit CO2, you are hurting everyone else. If you participate in a web browser monoculture, you allow one company to own the web, therefore hurting everyone else. Please don't absolve yourself of the harm you are causing those of us that don't want to be under Google's thumb.
        harel 3y ago
        I exhale co2. Should I stop breathing? Should we stop using cars all together? Stop flying? Stop using computers? Sorry but I don't operate in that absolutist way. Existence is not always fair, and it's not always without harm. Everyone has a footprint on their environment. Nobody is without one.
  - 93po 3y ago
    The internet doesn't have to be commercialized. Content like this would exist just fine without profits. "Adverts exist because we refuse to pay for every service" No, adverts exist largely because of poor quality content that ranks high in google and does everything possible to give readers the least amount of information in the slowest way possible. I would gladly pay to visit websites that shared a common ethical framework for cost sharing.
    - harel 3y ago
      Content like that will exist, and have existed before. But large scale operations will not. Search engines, LLMs, social networks. They need a lot of money to run at scale. LLMs charge a subscription. Kagi is doing search engine which is paid (and not bad). If they all started charging pretty soon we'll be paying through the nose for everything. Ads offset that. I pay Spotify, Amazon, OpenAI, Netflix, Diskey, and I'm considering paying Kagi. But I can't pay every single content provider I use... it will never end. I accept the ads where I can and pay where I cannot. I have a choice sometimes and I exercise it. I. Not some content site that makes the choice for me. That is my only point here.
      - 93po 3y ago
        Google doesn't need to exist. Google exists primarily to serve ads and websites with ads. Google is actively harming the internet by existing, not enhancing anything.
        harel 3y ago
        Ok. When you have statements that are based in reality and not some pseudo utopian ideological dogma state of mind I'll be happy to discuss them.
        93po 3y ago
        I hope you eventually spend more time thinking about this and form a more holistic view yourself.
skeaker 3y ago
Funny, since this is something that HN recommended websites begin doing after Google began pushing WEI [1]. Your frustration is intended in this case, the theory being that you'll be pestered into switching browsers. Annoying for some but you have to respect it in a way, what with how it's giving Chrome a taste of its own medicine. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36877524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36877524 - Quick example from a search.
- harel 3y ago
  When you said HN recommended, initially I read "YC & HN admins" recommended, but you meant "some people on HN". Look, I respect activism of this kind. But direct it where it's meaningful. It's not that I found not being able to comfortably read a lukewarm article about microwaves is the end of the world. The title on HN might as well have been about that "chrome blocker" because that was the actual story here. In the IE days people were furious when sites were only "optimised for IE".

by harel 3y ago

Boatfaceing 3y ago

[dead]

paulpauper 3y ago

same here. and no option to close it. is this some sort of joke or someting

account42 3y ago

Enjoy you advertiser-driven web.

harel 3y ago
This won't stop an advertiser driven web. Only an alternative approach that maintain provider profits. Adverts exist because we refuse to pay for every service. This doesn't offer an alternative, but presumes to know better by removing user's choice.
- tristan957 3y ago
  If people listened to the author of the web page, it would stop an ad-driven web. Because the world continues to use Chromium skins, we are inevitably going to get some technology that ad blockers won't work on any more. See FLoC, Web Bundles, or Web Integrity. How do you all use a browser that comes up with these adversarial technologies?
  - harel 3y ago
    Because on a daily basis, it doesn't affect me. Personally. I don't care. That's the honest answer. On days I do care, I have my means to be undetected. When the ads bother me, I switch on the pihole. Some sites don't work with pihole enabled so sometimes it's either off or I create exceptions. But I like Chrome. The convenience I get from chrome is invaluable to me. No other browser can give me that exactly. But all of the above are based on MY decisions. I chose to use X or to ignore Y. When a site decides that for me, well... I just walk away.
    - account42 3y ago
      I too do not care about the environment because a litle polltion won't make a difference. And I don't bother with a retirement fund because I make enough money for my needs right now so why care about the future.
      - harel 3y ago
        These are bad analogies. I can block ads on the net and still use chrome. I can choose whether ads bother me or not. I can choose if I want/agree to be tracked. My choice doesn't hurt anyone. You want to fight the ads - take on the ad networks. Provide an alternative. Without an alternative it's just a cardboard sign with some text.
        tristan957 3y ago
        If you emit CO2, you are hurting everyone else. If you participate in a web browser monoculture, you allow one company to own the web, therefore hurting everyone else. Please don't absolve yourself of the harm you are causing those of us that don't want to be under Google's thumb.
        harel 3y ago
        I exhale co2. Should I stop breathing? Should we stop using cars all together? Stop flying? Stop using computers? Sorry but I don't operate in that absolutist way. Existence is not always fair, and it's not always without harm. Everyone has a footprint on their environment. Nobody is without one.
- 93po 3y ago
  The internet doesn't have to be commercialized. Content like this would exist just fine without profits. "Adverts exist because we refuse to pay for every service" No, adverts exist largely because of poor quality content that ranks high in google and does everything possible to give readers the least amount of information in the slowest way possible. I would gladly pay to visit websites that shared a common ethical framework for cost sharing.
  - harel 3y ago
    Content like that will exist, and have existed before. But large scale operations will not. Search engines, LLMs, social networks. They need a lot of money to run at scale. LLMs charge a subscription. Kagi is doing search engine which is paid (and not bad). If they all started charging pretty soon we'll be paying through the nose for everything. Ads offset that. I pay Spotify, Amazon, OpenAI, Netflix, Diskey, and I'm considering paying Kagi. But I can't pay every single content provider I use... it will never end. I accept the ads where I can and pay where I cannot. I have a choice sometimes and I exercise it. I. Not some content site that makes the choice for me. That is my only point here.
    - 93po 3y ago
      Google doesn't need to exist. Google exists primarily to serve ads and websites with ads. Google is actively harming the internet by existing, not enhancing anything.
      - harel 3y ago
        Ok. When you have statements that are based in reality and not some pseudo utopian ideological dogma state of mind I'll be happy to discuss them.
        93po 3y ago
        I hope you eventually spend more time thinking about this and form a more holistic view yourself.

skeaker 3y ago

Funny, since this is something that HN recommended websites begin doing after Google began pushing WEI [1]. Your frustration is intended in this case, the theory being that you'll be pestered into switching browsers. Annoying for some but you have to respect it in a way, what with how it's giving Chrome a taste of its own medicine. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36877524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36877524 - Quick example from a search.

harel 3y ago
When you said HN recommended, initially I read "YC & HN admins" recommended, but you meant "some people on HN". Look, I respect activism of this kind. But direct it where it's meaningful. It's not that I found not being able to comfortably read a lukewarm article about microwaves is the end of the world. The title on HN might as well have been about that "chrome blocker" because that was the actual story here. In the IE days people were furious when sites were only "optimised for IE".