44 ms·
> I absolutely expect CNN, Google, and any other website to serve me malware. You can find many historical examples of the largest ad networks serving up malwar
by ESTheComposer 3y ago
> I absolutely expect CNN, Google, and any other website to serve me malware. You can find many historical examples of the largest ad networks serving up malware on just about any site in existence.
I would love to see a source of a large company like CNN knowingly serving malware in the guise of ads. I've never heard of that but I'm all ears; I feel like it would be big news if CNN knowingly put a crypto miner on your device.
> How should I legally/ethically block this malware without using a broad ad blocker?
I don't know but also now you're committing a fallacy known as "Irrelevant conclusion". Yes, there's a genuine question on how you can block malware without depriving website owners of their ad revenue, however it's irrelevant to the original argument of whether blocking ads is stealing (which we've somehow come to from a piracy argument but whatever). The argument becomes "Is blocking ads stealing when some of them give me malware", but that's separate from "Is blocking ads stealing".
Alternatively you might be trying to argue "but I block ads because some of them give me malware" which can be an appeal to pity[2], but I don't think you're trying to go that far.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrelevant_conclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrelevant_conclusion
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_pity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_pity
- angoragoats 3y agoWow, aren't you the fallacy guy. Please, give me more fallacies! I should just change my username to fallaciousgoats. How about this: I didn't use the word "knowingly" anywhere in my statement, and in fact I have no earthly idea whether the countless examples [1][2][3][4] of malware being served via ad networks on major websites was done knowingly. My guess is it wasn't? So you've got the beginnings of a straw man fallacy here, questioning an argument that I never actually made. If you'd like to learn more about why malware shows up on cross-site ad networks, there's a good quick read available at [5]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17550808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17550808 [2] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/hackers-abuse-google-ads-to-spread-malware-in-legit-software/ https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/hackers-abuse... [3] https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2023/01/18/google-ads-increasingly-pointing-to-malware/ https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2023/01/18/google-ads-increa... [4] https://blog.fox-it.com/2014/01/03/malicious-advertisements-served-via-yahoo/ https://blog.fox-it.com/2014/01/03/malicious-advertisements-... [5] https://theconversation.com/why-bad-ads-appear-on-good-websites-a-computer-scientist-explains-178268 https://theconversation.com/why-bad-ads-appear-on-good-websi...
- ESTheComposer 3y ago> Wow, aren't you the fallacy guy. Please, give me more fallacies! Ad hominem
- angoragoats 3y agoHaha good one!
- dang 3y agoYou broke the site guidelines repeatedly in this thread, and you've broken them in other threads too (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38695587 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38695587 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38539273 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38539273 ). We have to ban accounts that do this, so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules, that would be good.
- angoragoats 3y agoI apologize; I’ll review the guidelines and try to do better next time.