3 ms·
It is difficult to take the complaint terribly seriously when part of their case against Adblock Plus is that it “violates the freedom of the press”. Imagine i
by heads 3y ago
It is difficult to take the complaint terribly seriously when part of their case against Adblock Plus is that it “violates the freedom of the press”.
Imagine if newspapers were free and supported by ads, but only had ads in the top 2” x 2” corner, on the outside edge of the paper. Imagine also that I sold a kind of square knife-press that you could use to stamp-cut the ads out all in one go. No one would seriously claim I was doing something wrong — just move the ads around to random places on each page!
Is it laziness that stops publishers from shipping targeted ads from their own servers, inlined in the content in a way that cannot be distinguished from article images or text?
- jefftk 3y ago> Is it laziness that stops publishers from shipping targeted ads from their own servers, inlined in the content in a way that cannot be distinguished from article images or text? No, it's about fraud. With your proposal advertisers have to trust publishers really will show their ads, and unless the publisher is very large and has a reputation to protect advertisers pretty reasonably don't trust them. (We do actually see what you're proposing, with YouTube, Facebook, Google Search, etc) You could do this by having the ad networks serve the pages, reverse proxying to the publisher and inserting the ads. And then the publisher page can run its verification scripts, instead of the ads running verification scripts. But that gives us a web served by Google, Criteo, AppNexus, etc. which would be pretty sad.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]