26 ms·
FBI recommends using an ad blocker (2022)
- robpco 2y agoFYI - this is from December 21, 2022
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- TechDebtDevin 2y agoIt's always an insane experience when you hop on someone's laptop/PC who has zero ad blocking installed. POV: https://m.youtube.com/shorts/iV3js9pd5IE https://m.youtube.com/shorts/iV3js9pd5IE
- mrinfinitiesx 2y agoI just go to ublock origin on firefox and install it, they'll never ask about it; i'm just doing them a solid.
- shkkmo 2y agoGiven the numbers of times I've had to disable ad blocker to fix some janky page I have to use, I don't think installing an ad blocker without explaining or even mentioning it is a friendly act.
- asib 2y agoAbsolutely agree. I often disable my ad blocker/cookie blocker when I'm about to make a big purchase (e.g. airline tickets) in case they interrupt whatever crazy redirect flow the airline and their payment processor have.
- prmoustache 2y agoNever happened to me but I guess that kind of shop would simply loose a sale.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 2y agoI don't think it happened to me, but then I don't venture outside Amazon, Newegg.. major sites that much. But even then.. if they need all those crazy redirects, maybe they don't want my business.
- Tanoc 2y agoIf you ever limit the number of redirects to one in Firefox by using about:config, you'll see that most sites do at least two per page. It makes me wonder how many useless portals there actually are just because people glue together CDNs and add more off-site frameworks like Akamai and Typekit.
- mrinfinitiesx 2y agoI mention it, they usually have no idea what I'm talking about sadly. I don't think ad-tech is a friendly act. Infact, I find it insulting, invasive, and completely violating what they do with the personal data when they sell it 6 ways to sunday, but enough about that. Usually if I'm on somebody else's computer it's because they need me to fix things for them, or speed things up or 'make it better' which means it's getting adblock. The amount of modals and tricks and things they fall for especially my elderly neighbors or people wanting their business laptops setup especially Windows that have jank ass webpages that have the 'Download' link be some arbitrary .exe for something completely not what they wanted to download put something on their system is crazy.. hell even Youtube is giving people scams. I just fixed some women's sobriety center's computer for free and their user account had some anti virus secure browser opening 20+ 'browsers' on boot for 'AG' free anti-virus. Never had an issue with ublock breaking anything important for me. Air travel, hotels, ordering things online, if something says disable my adblocker I close it out and never go to that domain again. To each their own though. I don't do ads though and will save every soul I can. Ad-tech is cyber terrorism at this point, and I stick to my guns.
- kurthr 2y agoAds (with untrusted javascript and links) considered harmful.
- giancarlostoro 2y agoI have a confession to make. I don't really have ad-block. If your site is too ad-infested, I stop using it.
- Waterluvian 2y agoThat feels like a pretty fair approach. If you don’t mind, I’m truly curious why you don’t Adblock? There’s no wrong answer here. ;)
- Lord_Zero 2y agoThere might be...
- hirvi74 2y agoNot the GP you are asking, but I do not use an ad blocker because I predominantly use Safari as my browser. I would absolutely love one, but after Apple made all those API changes years back, I gave up trying to find one that works well and is privacy friendly.
- azinman2 2y agoThe changes Apple made were to increase privacy. Content blockers that have access to the page have no network access. A separate process that does can only update the blocking rules. I quite like Ka-block
- gerdesj 2y ago"The changes Apple made were to increase privacy" Apple gobbles personal data too and processes it and sells it etc. They are simply rather better at looking ... friendly. They really are very good at that.
- azinman2 2y agoWhere is Apple tracking your usage across the web? This data is sold to who? These are big claims. Disclosure: I work at Apple, and have seen zero evidence of anything but trying to make things continuously more secure and private. This in fact makes my job (machine learning) much harder because I don’t have user datasets to leverage.
- the_snooze 2y agoIt's such a jarring difference when I'm browsing on my phone at home with Pi-Hole vs. when away. So much that it motivated me to set up a split tunnel VPN so all my phone's DNS requests go through my home Pi-Hole regardless of what network it's on.
- hunter2_ 2y agoI used to do this, but lately I just set my phone to use dns.adguard-dns.com as the DNS resolver which gives extremely similar results. It's a Russian operator, but I don't have much of a reason to trust any other DNS operator more.
- userbinator 2y agoIt's no wonder people have gotten a lot more ignorant and less observant when they have to constantly fight the bombardment of their attention by unwanted distractions. In that situation of using someone else's device, I've had to move windows half off the screen to be able to concentrate on an article when the ads on the side were constantly distracting me.
- ryandrake 2y agoFunny how here's HN, a site full of Software Engineers complaining about ad bombardment, and every single one of those ads were programmed by... a software engineer! We (as a profession) are the ones doing this! "Oh, but boss told me to do it!" some will say, as if it's a good excuse. Regardless of which manager told which developer to do it, at the end of the day, a developer typed in the code and pushed it to prod. We're at least partially to blame for what the web has become.
- mr_toad 2y agoDespite what management might think we are not interchangeable parts.
- malux85 2y agoThis is completely meaningless. In any population big enough theres going to be a high variance in behaviours, including morality. Expecting all individuals in a huge collective to all behave "good" with little / no inforcement is incredibly naive at best and dangerous at worst. Not only that, but you're wrong on a technicality too - > and every single one of those ads were programmed by... a software engineer! Many ads are designed by creatives and placed and run by dedicated non-software engineering people, including deciding how many are run and their placement (i.e. bombardment or not). Sure engineers programmed the platform, but then you're just blaming the post office for the content of the mail, or the ISP for the content of the internet. What do you expect the software engineers to do? Limit 1 ad per page programatically and then every software engineer on earth must agree to enforce that limit and no matter how much pressure their superiors put on them, everybody holds the line? This is not a rhetorical question, How do you expect all software engineers to be unified on a single solution to ad bombardment, given the internet is international, driven by market dynamics and capitalism and a non-trivial number of programmers are beholden to tyrannical managers because of their life situation (it can still be a minority, and ad bombardment emerges)?
- bookofjoe 2y agoBetter not use mine...
- ThePowerOfFuet 2y agoHere's your YouTube link without the creepy Google tracking (and with the missing playback controls): https://youtube.com/watch?v=iV3js9pd5IE https://youtube.com/watch?v=iV3js9pd5IE
- lupire 2y agoLooks like the same tracking, just main YT view not Shorts
- jart 2y agoI've been using Safari on occasion for the past year because it starts up faster. I was too lazy to figure out how to install an ad blocker there and the strangest thing happened. I saw an ad many months later and realized I couldn't remember seeing a single one until that point. I suppose it's because I've become so good at avoiding the types of websites that have ads that maybe I don't even need an ad blocker (I'm extremely opposed to seeing ads that aren't SuperBowl ads). There also aren't that many website I visit. I use GitHub. I watch Netflix and Amazon where I can pay extra to not see ads. I also pay for YouTube Red. I use Kagi which is another place I can pay to not see ads. I also read Hacker News, where I'm always super careful to check that the domain on a link looks like a real person's website (i.e. isn't something like nytimes) before clicking.
- belinder 2y agoFor computer health your PC needs an ad blocker, but also for mental health. At what point will the CDC recommend using it
- dbg31415 2y ago[flagged]
- lapcat 2y agoCan the FBI now arrest Sundar Pichai for obstructing justice with Chrome MV3?
- purple-leafy 2y agoI make loads of browser extensions, is there any wins that can be had by building another ad-blocker? An manifest v3 compliant one. Or does unlock origin lite cover everything? I was thinking continent specific ad blockers etc
- hootz 2y agoAll work is pretty much already done by uBlock Origin Lite and AdGuard MV3. Manifest v3 fucking sucks, and people will probably need to go to system-wide ad blocking such as AdGuard to block ads using all the filters, as v3 limits the number of filters you can use.
- purple-leafy 2y agoIs adguard a system level script interceptor like wire shark?
- davidmurphy 2y ago[flagged]
- rkagerer 2y agoI'd like to see society in general become less tolerant of unwanted ads. The original Google site hit the perfect pitch, where they set a few unobtrusive ones out of the way alongside your results screen. Ironic they pioneered and eventually normalized what is now an epidemic of user-hostile spam all over the web. I feel as a whole we lose a lot more productivity and focus to this than we gain in economic activity.
- Terr_ 2y ago> The original Google site For your nostalgia and/or despair, I found a chronological list of screenshots: https://scaledon.com/the-evolution-of-google-ads/ https://scaledon.com/the-evolution-of-google-ads/
- rkagerer 2y agoThank you! I actually tried to find an illustration, and your link fits the bill perfectly.
- rendaw 2y ago> Google Ads became more user-friendly in 2014. The yellow box that contains the ad disappears and users could quickly scroll through the ads section. Can someone please explain these two sentences to me?
- hypeatei 2y ago> Before clicking on an advertisement, check the URL to make sure the site is authentic Yeah, good luck doing that with all the various tracking links that mask the actual domain. Sometimes I try to click on links from legit account related emails that are blocked by UBO for being part of a tracker/ad network.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- NegativeK 2y agoI hear this advice from other infosec people constantly, and it's starting to grate. In one breath we tell users "attackers are professionals who are doing this eight hours a day; they're probably going to trick you", and in another we're trying to get users -- who are busy doing their jobs -- to recognize the difference between an I or an l, or maybe go do a domain history lookup to see if businessandsons.com is some new knockoff of businessllc.com, or maybe figure out how to parse whatever the email reputation filter mangled the domain into. I know perfect is the enemy of good and defense in depth and etc, etc, but this advice just seems crap.
- Sephr 2y agoGoogle has convinced regulatory agencies that they're not responsible for their own complicity with supporting link fraud. I wrote an article about Google's role in enabling link fraud[1], which shows how this is effectively a form of regulatory capture. Here's a particularly salient critique of these very same FBI recommendations, from my article: > The FBI suggests “Before clicking on an advertisement, check the URL to make sure the site is authentic. A malicious domain name may be similar to the intended URL but with typos or a misplaced letter.” — this is useless advice in the face of unverified vanity URLs 1. https://eligrey.com/blog/link-fraud/ https://eligrey.com/blog/link-fraud/
- kenjackson 2y agoCan’t an ad always just redirect traffic to a vanity URL while exposing a non-vanity URL to Google?
- yard2010 2y agoAFAIR it's against their code, they do have strict rules regarding their ads. But it's funny I remember adsense fighting the bs fraud ads on the internet, only to become the bs fraud themselves..
- Sephr 2y agoThe core issue here is that Google does not effectively verify ownership of vanity URLs displayed to users. You may not ever connect to the vanity URL in the first place.
- janalsncm 2y agoI don’t think it’s reasonable to expect zero link fraud facilitated by Google, in the same way I don’t expect zero money laundering facilitated through banks. But banks are heavily regulated and (at a minimum) have to go through the motions of KYC and disrupting illegal activity. I think the issue here is we have allowed online platforms to reap the rewards of scale without requiring any responsibility of serving a billion+ people. Internalize rewards, externalize responsibility.
- Hnrobert42 2y ago[2022] - I thought I'd heard this before.
- yoyar 2y agoWindows itself is malware.
- BaculumMeumEst 2y agoWhat would tip the scales to justify including an ad-blocker in Safari by default?
- lapcat 2y agoThe new version of Safari to be released this month has made very tentative steps into content blocking, but it's all manual by the user, and there's still been a lot of pushback on the feature by advertisers. I guess Apple may be wary of antitrust concerns.
- vunderba 2y agoPSA: Even among tech minded folks, a surprising number of people are still using adblock which is widely known to use sponsored whitelists to allow companies to bypass the filters. The gold standard which works as an extension in both chrome and Firefox is uBlock Origin, annoyingly not to be confused with uBlock. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin/cjpal... Also be aware that Google continues to add restrictions to extension permissions such that uBlock Origin may not be as effective as it once was.
- dylan604 2y ago> Also be aware that Google continues to add restrictions to extension permissions such that uBlock Origin may not be as effective as it once was. That's fine. I don't use a Google made browser, so this would not affect me at all. It would also be very easy for this to not affect you too if you just had the courage to stop being a sheeple
- vunderba 2y agoI'm not sure who this comment is directed at and I can't speak for everyone but I do think some people have to use Chrome as a requirement from their jobs - such as UI/UX testing for frontend development. So for them, it's better than nothing.
- dylan604 2y agoyou can use what ever browser for UI/UX testing purposes, but it doesn't have to be your daily driver.
- simple10 2y agoIs the warning on uBlock Origin Chrome extension page due to it not using the manifest v3? Anybody know if uBlock is still the best option for Chrome?
- userbinator 2y agoMeanwhile, Microsoft fights with itself on whether adblocking is good or bad: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/edge/learning-center/using-ad-blockers?form=MA13I2 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/edge/learning-center/using-a... https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/supported-browsers-for-outlook-on-the-web-and-outlook-com-ca350265-6284-4682-9abd-85fc2bd37934 https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/supported-browser...
- taf2 2y agoI must be a strange person because I don’t run any adblocker… if I happen to need to visit an ad stricken site I just toggle on reader mode. Get my info and get out… I never have to worry about clicking on a search result and it doing nothing … but also I rarely visit these ad sites…. For the cookie banners I just inspect and delete the elements when they get in the way…
- aflag 2y agoAn ad blocker would save you some extra clicks.
- NegativeK 2y ago> I never have to worry about clicking on a search result and it doing nothing I can't remember the last time I noticed that the ad blocker even existed on my machine. Occasionally some clever site will basically say "if you can see this, we're supported by ads and could use your help" -- but it doesn't break things and I don't see ad links in search results.
- Terr_ 2y agoI've love to see what happens if ad-networks became legally liable for any scams or malware that they enable. The counter-argument that they don't need to know their customer/ad and are just dumb-pipes doesn't sit well with me: Them having awareness of ad-content and display-context is ostensibly part of their business model. P.S.: I don't mean just liable for a part of the damages, although that would be a good start. I mean that if your Aunt Tillie gets served an ad of "Your computer is infected, click here to contact a Microsoft Technican" there should be some negative repercussions for the company, even if your Aunt Tillie is secretly the hacker BakinC00kies and spins up a honeypot.
- imoverclocked 2y agoWe still haven’t reached peak Idiocracy. YouTube/hulu/disney+ still cut to ads instead of displaying them around the border of the content. Carl’s Jr/Brawndo still haven’t purchased the FCC. We are pretty close though.
- chgs 2y agoToo easy to block adverts around the border with cardboard. They still need to make people actually think that adverts are good
- A4ET8a8uTh0 2y agoHonestly, we are there. It just didn't make the news yet for some unknown reason.
- wasteduniverse 2y ago[dead]
- karlzt 2y agoPreviously: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34916239 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34916239 734 points | 2 years ago | 430 comments
- thimabi 2y agoRecently, my grandmother got herself scammed when trying to pay her bills, because she clicked a Google search ad for a fraudulent website posing as the local gas company. She lost some money and, of course, some of her personal data as well. When situations like this happen, I mostly place the blame on ad companies. It’s their product, so it should be their responsibility to prevent abuses. But there is scant regulation, and the ad industry itself has little concern for privacy and data protection. Why would it waste money being proactive and effective against malicious ads? It is nice to see the government recommending ad blockers. However, it bothers me that it is up to us, users and customers, to deal with the negligence of ad companies.
- meowster 2y agoI wonder what would happen if you (she) sued Google.
- thimabi 2y agoI wonder too, but suing is expensive and demands some time that we don’t have. Yet we did notify the cybercrime team at the police department, so maybe they will do something about it.
- meowster 2y agoIf the amount is/was under the small claims court level, that would be a vastly cheaper and easier route to take. Rules vary by state, but I believe generally you cannot select an arbitrary amount lower than the monetary threshold just to use small claims court, but you might be able to argue Google has 50% or some other culpability if that will get the amount under the threshold. IANAL.
- rty32 2y agoWonder if someone would make a YouTube video talking about using uBlock origin to block YouTube ads, citing FBI's recommendation, see if it gets taken down by violation of YouTube's ToS.
- xoxxala 2y agoLinus Tech Tips just had a video on using adblockers, as part of their "how to de-Google your life" series, taken down by YT for posting "harmful or dangerous content". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apdZ7xmytiQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apdZ7xmytiQ
- shiroiushi 2y agoWow, that sounds like something out of Russia's playbook.
- dopadelic 2y agoAdblock would break most websites nowadays. It's commonplace to detect adblock and disable the website if adblock is detected.
- hollerith 2y agoYeah, better not to install any kind of adblock even as a test. No one else does. You would be alone. Also, people who use adblock are antisocial. Also, I'd be mortified if I visited a web page, then the site told me that I cannot continue because I have adblock installed. I wouldn't want that to happen to me even once.
- caseyy 2y ago[flagged]
- hollerith 2y agoIn addition to the threat to children, there's also terrorism to consider. It is frightening to consider that the World Trade Center towers might still be standing were it not for ordinary users who foolishly assumed that nothing really bad could happen if they installed adblock.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 2y agoWhen I have a time to unwind and think less sensible thoughts, I can't help but wonder whether anti-fossil fuels movement would try to capitalize on 9/11 if it happened today and not in 2001 by trying to ban use of planes due to amount of fuel used. "Terrorists use planes. You are not a terrorist, are you?"
- consteval 2y agoYes, famously the established miliary industrial complex, fiercely anti-fossil fuel. Never mind the end result of 9/11 was used for... pro fossil fuel reasons. And the entire war fought afterwards was done for, let me just check my notes here... oil. Oh. And we didn't even invade the right country? hm.
- eh_why_not 2y agoNo-JS user here. A disturbing trend noticed in the past two months: can't login anymore to some financial/health services sites (bank/insurance/etc) without disabling all of NoScript - no amount of selective enabling of websites satisfies them, and those websites are using known infractors like Adobe. In other words, there is code in the backend checking that all tracking/-ware has run on the browser, and refusing to let you login unless you let it all run, while none of it is necessary (as evidenced by older versions - and other sites - accepting only the top site being JS-enabled). "We either track the living shit out of you, or you don't access the essential services you need, even though technically it is not needed."
- Hakkin 2y agouBlock Origin has some advanced filter syntax that can sometimes deal with sites like this. It can intercept, modify or replace JavaScript functions, objects, network requests, parsing data, cookies, etc. That being said, writing filters for sites like these is somewhat of a dark art, it usually involves reverse engineering the page's JavaScript to the point where you understand what it's actually sending and checking for to function correctly, then figuring out a way to bypass those checks by selectively modifying the JavaScript's functionality. Things like this are why I worry a bit about the proliferation of things like WASM, while JavaScript isn't great, it actually gives a great amount of control to the end user, to both see, understand and the ability to actually modify what is running in their browser. With WASM, all of this becomes highly impractical. Instead of a (semi-)readable, modifiable block of interpreted code, with the ability to inspect and modify the state at almost arbitrary points, you just get opaque binary blobs that you basically can't do anything with. As more and more sites switch to using compiled WASM blobs for their logic, it will become increasingly difficult to observe or modify any behavior of these websites as an end user.
- bryant 2y agoDo you have a list of offenders by any chance?
- 0xffff2 2y agoMeh, I've noticed this without any blockers at all. I cannot log in to my power company's website from my PC (on any browser) and likewise for Delta Dental on any device. So far I have been able to work around this, but I don't understand how its possible to break login so badly that even unmodified Edge doesn't work and it stays like this for months.
- jampekka 2y ago> Most internet browsers allow a user to add extensions, including extensions that block advertisements. This may be sadly outdated. Android Chrome and iOS Webkit probably account for majority of traffic nowadays, and neither allows adblock extensions.
- amusingimpala75 2y agoThat's false. See AdGuard for iOS https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047223162 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047...
- jampekka 2y agoOh, thanks!
- slowhadoken 2y agoThe FBI also suggests using VPNs.
- ls612 2y agoPeople shit on the FBI (for good reason) for being a tool of the ruling class, but their cybersecurity recommendations are consistently solid. They were amongst the first to suggest disabling Flash and Java in the browser for instance back in 2012.
- slowhadoken 2y agoWhen a bartender screws up a customer gets over served. When the feds screw up people die. It’s good to be vigilant when it comes to government and it’s also wise to consider the scale and scope of federal operation. The CIA is where things start to get sticky.
- declan_roberts 2y agoWhat's the current status of whole-network blockers that use DNS? I tried pihole maybe 8 years ago, and it just broke too many websites for me to leave it on for my wife. It really frustrated her.
- tgmatt 2y agoI don't use it personally but know several people that do. It has different levels of blocking, and so if you have the patience, you can go full block mode and gradually peel back the blocking to sites that you want to use. My friends thoroughly recommend it.
- nobody9999 2y ago>I tried pihole maybe 8 years ago, and it just broke too many websites for me to leave it on for my wife. It really frustrated her. I've been running pi-hole at home for three or four years with minimal issues. The times when I have seen issues, I just go to the admin webpage, disable blocking for some period of time, and try again. And it's almost never Pi-hole causing the issue unless I'm trying to click on an affiliate link[0]. I mention this not as something your wife might do, but to clarify that pi-hole (with default settings) almost never blocks anything I click on, and when it does, I'm almost always glad it did. As such, assuming your wife isn't clicking marketing/advertising/affiliate links, pi-hole should be just fine for your home IMHO. As always, YMMV. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affiliate_marketing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affiliate_marketing
- anonymous247 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- patrakov 2y agoAnd in China, using ad blockers is illegal. Go figure.
- noirchen 2y agoThat's nonsense. Searching for "广告拦截" on Baidu returns hundreds of thousands of webpages and tutorials telling users how to install and turn on ad blockers, and Chinese smartphone brands often boast that their products perform better than competitors in blocking ads. What you are saying seems like a misunderstood version of the fact that some "ads" are whitelisted by default and you can't block them painlessly, mostly from the telecom giants that provide internet access for you.
- patrakov 2y agoSee https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/tie7un/ublock_origin_is_blocked_by_mozilla_in_china/ https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/tie7un/ublock...
- toastercat 2y ago[flagged]
- pdntspa 2y agoThis idea that content owners need compensation for making their content available needs to go. There was an entire generation of kind souls doing exactly that until the culture was suffocated to death by late-stage American capitalism. I and many others gladly made content available to others at our own cost. The mission of making knowledge available to those less fortunate than oneself (especially in this inflated first-world lifestyle) should supercede the need for financial gain. But once the actual moneyed assholes come in and take over, everything gets expensive and unaffordable and now you absolutely need a business model just to build something. Perhaps ad blockers and piracy are the much-needed counterbalancing force keeping the monster at bay.
- Loughla 2y agoI'm with you. I really am. I genuinely miss the web when it seemed wild and free and not just a collection of five companies. The problem is that the old way is dead. And its own popularity killed it. Just for example; There is no way a video hosting site the size and scope of YouTube could have possibly existed when the Internet was a hobby. What do we do with that?
- noirbot 2y agoThe issue is that I'm generally willing to watch some ads for youtube or such. I get that it's expensive to host that and I get my time/money's worth. But then I load a random recipe site or code docs site and get the page 40% covered by shitty ads for near-pornographic content and I install an ad blocker. So many sites just cramming ads into every single square inch of their sites ruins it for almost everyone else. I get a visceral reaction to banner ads now. I totally understand the economics of it, and the fact that you can't bootstrap something like Youtube by charging for it, but that's just how it is. It's a shame that the responsible sites are getting painted with the same brush, but so much of the internet has gotten so insanely greedy with ads that there's just no other choice.
- notinmykernel 2y agoFBI has also warned against placement of smart home assistants (e.g. Alexa) in bathroom and bedroom.
- spacebacon 2y agoJeff Johnson’s “Stop the Script” (iOS, MacOS). Blocks all JS, including inline. If a site doesn’t have a fallback to serve static content or is not readable when I disable JavaScript… I leave.
- beloch 2y ago>Cyber criminals purchase advertisements that appear within internet search results using a domain that is similar to an actual business or service. When a user searches for that business or service, these advertisements appear at the very top of search results with minimum distinction between an advertisement and an actual search result. Governments should start holding companies that sell ad space responsible for the ads they run. There's no way any company with the resources of Alphabet or Meta should be serving up phishing ads in their search results. The fact that Google is presently trying to degrade the performance of ad blockers with Manifest V3 is not a good look. This is why we have consumer protection laws.
- Summerbud 2y agoThis is where SEO leading to :(
- Alifatisk 2y agoI hope the raise of llms searching the web and acting as a middle-man makes websites ridden with ads obselete. If you've ever looked for a recipe, you'll know how many obstacles there is without ublock. My hate is towards these type of websites.
- OnestepGrow 2y ago[dead]