Is adblocking a DMCA violation?
-
@masonwheeler That's a report that a reputable website, at some point in the past served Malware. No-one denies that this has happened in the past (I personally have had ads on Fark.com hijack my iPad to redirect me to the app-store.)
Again, no-one here is suggesting that malware has not sometimes been served by ad networks
The point in contentions is that THE VAST MAJORITY OF ADS do so. Proving a much weaker statement is uninteresting, because no-one is contesting that much weaker form.
Suffice to say, since neither your link nor the Forbes wesite is currently serving malware, it does not actually meet any of the terms of my challenge.
-
@heterodox said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
In 21 years on the Internet, I've never had an ad try to infect my PC with malware.
I have. Maybe 3 times (twice on a Windows PC, once on an iPad). I've been using the Net since it was mostly gopher and Usenet.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@masonwheeler That's a report that a reputable website, at some point in the past served Malware. No-one denies that this has happened in the past (I personally have had ads on Fark.com hijack my iPad to redirect me to the app-store.)
Again, no-one here is suggesting that malware has not sometimes been served by ad networks
The point in contentions is that THE VAST MAJORITY OF ADS do so. Proving a much weaker statement is uninteresting, because no-one is contesting that much weaker form.
Suffice to say, since neither your link nor the Forbes wesite is currently serving malware, it does not actually meet any of the terms of my challenge.
As was pointed out earlier, this is an exaggeration. However, it doesn't need to be literally true to be figuratively true and correct enough.
Let's say only a tiny fraction of ads out there are malicious. Maybe 0.1% of all Web advertising. But how long does it take you to run across 1000 ads on today's Web?
-
@gwowen DeviantArt asked me to turn off my adblocking once, so I did. Within a few page navigations, an ad covered the page and downloaded a malicious file, and pointed an arrow at where chrome's downloaded file bar is, telling me to click open the malicious file (which Chrome thankfully blocked). That was enough for me to turn adblocking back on permanently. My trust was lost, even if that ad only appears 0.01% of the time.
-
@lb_ said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
My trust was lost, even if that ad only appears 0.01% of the time.
This is a completely reasonable, justifiable and defensible position to take. In fact, it would remain so if the percentage was 0.000001% rather than 0.01%.
I live out in the sticks. The odds that someone will try and rob my house on a given night is probably less than 1 in 1000. Nevertheless, I lock the doors before I go to bed.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Let's say only a tiny fraction of ads out there are malicious. Maybe 0.1% of all Web advertising.
Then we'd be in violent agreement. And this discussion would've never started, and I wouldn't have had to take @blakeyrat's side on anything and I'd generally be a lot happier.
But how long does it take you to run across 1000 ads on today's Web?
I have no idea. I use an adblocker.
-
We need to talk about the internet's fake ads problem
Promoted stories placed at the bottom of some of the world's most-respected websites are being gamed to show fake news
Doesn't support the claim.
Ad watchdog to launch crackdown on misleading internet ads
The advertising watchdog will launch a crackdown next year on businesses that run misleading internet ads that rip off consumers.
Doesn't support the claim.
Why Are People Using Ad Blockers? Ads Can Eat Up To 79% Of Mobile Data Allotments
By now, usage caps on both fixed and wireless networks have grown increasingly common. And while broadband carriers are endlessly looking toward caps and zero rating for a competitive and financial…
Doesn't appear to have anything remotely to do with the claim.
You say advertising, I say block that malware
The real reason online advertising is doomed and adblockers thrive? Its malware epidemic is unacknowledged, and out of control. The Forbes 30 Under 30 list came out this week and it featured a prominent security researcher. Other researchers were pleased to see one of their own getting positive...
This one comes the closest, in that it actually contains numbers instead of vague descriptors, but it still doesn't contain enough numbers to support the claim.
@pjh said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Rebuttion of an argument used for ad-blocking is an argument against it.
Calling out bullshit is calling out bullshit. It's a hobby of mine.
Based on those links you provided, especially the third one which is way out in left field, I'm not sure you even remember the claim you're attempting to defend here. Scroll up and read it again.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Something that should be common knowledge by way of personal experience to anyone who's spent any amount of time online is not an extraordinary claim, and it does not require extraordinary evidence.
I've never used an ad-blocker. I'd wager a guess that perhaps 1-2% of the ads I've seen are fraudulent in some way. Usually those "content sharing" ads that take the form of squares with compelling photos and some kind of attention-grabbing headline like "87% of drivers don't know this one car insurance trick!" (And even those I'm not 100% sure are fraudulent, they might link to a legit product. I don't click them.)
Especially when you compare it to TV, the medium of "apply directly to forehead", I see no difference between online ads and any other type.
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
The first time I visited a legitimate website that should have been perfectly safe and had an ad on the page use malicious JavaScript to try to serve malware to me, with no interaction whatsoever on my part with the displayed ad content on the page, was more than ten years ago. It's only gotten worse since then, and every even slightly computer savvy person knows it. So why don't you?
The claim is that the majority of ads are fraudulent. Which is clearly bullshit.
Another person who seems to have forgotten what the claim they're trying to support is. Scroll up and read it again.
-
@heterodox said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
This topic is making me feel like that's extremely unusual for some reason. I don't know what's up with that. I guess the next ten replies to this post are going to be people telling me my objective experience is wrong.
You're not. What's happening is people feel subconsciously guilty about blocking ads and depriving websites of revenue, so they invent some bullshit reason why it's "ok" to do so.
Back when people pirated music, they were all "well CDs are too expensive." People who steal games will pop-off "I wouldn't have bought the game anyway" at a second's notice. It's just post-hoc rationalization. Because one website infected one computer once, it's ok to block ads on every website forever.
And hey, if that's your thing, whatever. That's your thing. Just don't make wild insane claims like "the majority of ads are fraudulent!" and not expect people to call you on it. Because that's insane.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
As was pointed out earlier, this is an exaggeration. However, it doesn't need to be literally true to be figuratively true and correct enough.
Of course it's an exaggeration. A ridiculous, insane, one. Clearly bullshit. The surprising thing is that morons on this forum were trying to defend it as if it were a factual statement.
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Let's say only a tiny fraction of ads out there are malicious. Maybe 0.1% of all Web advertising. But how long does it take you to run across 1000 ads on today's Web?
See, now if you say reasonable things like that, I wouldn't call them out as being clearly bullshit. Because it's not clearly bullshit.
My personal experience says your number is still way too high (unless you only visit porn or warez sites that get kicked off the quality ad exchanges, then it might be reasonable.)
And I'll be the first one to complain that Cracked.com, which used to be a fun daily read, is not almost entirely unreadable due to insane amounts of advertising. Nothing that's fraudulent or dangerous, just way too much of it running way too much script. It's a shame. My solution to the site with bad advertising: I don't visit the site.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Especially when you compare it to TV, the medium of "apply directly to forehead", I see no difference between online ads and any other type.
I have yet to see any TV equivalent of those banner ads with fake 'plugin missing' images or giant 'download' buttons meant to trick people into thinking they're part of the site they're displayed on.
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I have yet to see any TV equivalent of those banner ads with fake 'plugin missing' images or giant 'download' buttons meant to trick people into thinking they're part of the site they're displayed on.
Last time I saw anything like that was 1999. Stop visiting porn sites?
Either way, to say those ads are the "majority" is a completely insane bullshit statement. I'm starting to think people on this forum don't even understand what the word "majority" means. Is it like "ideal", just a concept you retards don't get at all?
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Back when people pirated music, they were all "well CDs are too expensive." People who steal games will pop-off "I wouldn't have bought the game anyway" at a second's notice. It's just post-hoc rationalization. Because one website infected one computer once, it's ok to block ads on every website forever.
Frankly, what I'd like to see more websites do is to allow you to view the content for a small fee without ads. The CPM rates are shit anyway, one ad impression is what, a few tenths of a cent of profit to the ad space owner? I could easily cover that from my own pocket. Some sites implement that with a monthly fee, but the problem is that with the Internet you generally don't just stick to a single news portal, and paying a monthly fee to each of the portals you occasionally visit gets expensive. Maybe if it was an ad network's feature?
I'd like the choice to be between "paying" for the content by viewing ads, and just paying with money. Instead it's either view ads, don't view the content at all, or use an adblocker which hurts the site owner.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Either way, to say those ads are the "majority" is a completely insane bullshit statement. I'm starting to think people on this forum don't even understand what the word "majority" means. Is it like "ideal", just a concept you retards don't get at all?
Find the part of my post where I said anything about a majority.
-
@maciejasjmj said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Frankly, what I'd like to see more websites do is to allow you to view the content for a small fee without ads.
I would support that also, as long as the site didn't fuck it up like YouTube did when they implemented the concept. (If you like smaller YouTube channels, you actually fuck them over by buying YouTube Red. They don't get their nominal ad views, and also don't quality for YouTube Red disbursements. Fuck Google.)
It really depends.
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Find the part of my post where I said anything about a majority.
That what the whole discussion's been about.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
You're not. What's happening is people feel subconsciously guilty about blocking ads and depriving websites of revenue, so they invent some bullshit reason why it's "ok" to do so.
I feel zero guilt--none whatsoever--about "depriving someone of revenue" if their source of revenue directly harms me.
If I support efforts to shut down an operation that's polluting the air I breathe or the water I drink, that will deprive them of revenue too. Too bad; sucks to be them. They should find some way to earn revenue without harming those around them.
This is no different; modern Web advertising is toxic script pollution.
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I have yet to see any TV equivalent of those banner ads with fake 'plugin missing' images or giant 'download' buttons meant to trick people into thinking they're part of the site they're displayed on.
Last time I saw anything like that was 1999. Stop visiting porn sites?
So you haven't been to SourceForge anytime this century? It's absolutely rampant there, and they're definitely a legitimate site. (A sucky one, but that's a different matter.)
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I feel zero guilt--none whatsoever--about "depriving someone of revenue" if their source of revenue directly harms me.
If you just block every ad everywhere, how do you even judge this is happening? From one article you read in Forbes years ago? It's like the rock Lisa Simpson sold to keep away tigers.
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
This is no different; modern Web advertising is toxic script pollution.
Your odds of getting "poisoned" from an ad are probably less than your odds of getting poisoned from your municipal water supply.
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
So you haven't been to SourceForge anytime this century?
God no. Why would I? Why would you?
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
It's absolutely rampant there, and they're definitely a legitimate site. (A sucky one, but that's a different matter.)
Then block those ads on SourceForge. This is no excuse to harm completely innocent and unaware journalist 6,000 miles away who'd never even heard of "SourceForge".
You're a big user of StackOverflow, do you block their ads? "Fuck you, Q&A site I love to post at every day!"
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
If you just block every ad everywhere, how do you even judge this is happening? From one article you read in Forbes years ago? It's like the rock Lisa Simpson sold to keep away tigers.
Now who's making ridiculous exaggerations? The Forbes thing happened a few months ago. This is not "something that happened years ago"; it's current events. It's the state of the Web as it is today!
Your odds of getting "poisoned" from an ad are probably less than your odds of getting poisoned from your municipal water supply.
I have adblock at home. I don't have it at work. Just in the course of ordinary, legitimate browsing, I see malicious redirects or get virus alerts off of webpages at work something like once a week.
Don't be this guy, OK?
God no. Why would I? Why would you?
...umm, maybe because they host some stuff I'm interested in that still hasn't migrated to better sites?
Then block those ads on SourceForge. This is no excuse to harm completely innocent and unaware journalist 6,000 miles away who'd never even heard of "SourceForge".
If they're any sort of journalist at all--particularly of the online variety--they don't need to have heard of SourceForge to have heard of malicious advertising.
You're a big user of StackOverflow, do you block their ads? "Fuck you, Q&A site I love to post at every day!"
No, I actually let those ones through, specifically because I'm aware of the lengths they go through to vet ads. They are very much an exception, though, not the rule. "The rule" these days is to use an ad network, and even the best of them (such as Google AdWords) is just not careful enough to keep malicious ads off their network. So I have to keep them off of my computer instead.
-
@raceprouk said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@el_heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Two days ago, a commit appeared in the Easylist repo on Github, removing the domain
functionalclam.comfrom Easylist, following a DMCA takedown notice filed with Github. That domain appears to be owned by US-based anti-adblocking company Admiral who claims that publishers have lost $13.4 Billion so far this year, due to AdBlock.I'd be surprised if they've lost as much as $1.34 from AdBlock.
Also, I decided to have a look at that site mentioned:
Are you sure about that?
Obviously it was impossible.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I have adblock at home. I don't have it at work. Just in the course of ordinary, legitimate browsing, I see malicious redirects or get virus alerts off of webpages at work something like once a week.
Srsly?
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Don't be this guy, OK?
I'm not. It's like when I say "Windows always gives me 72 hour notice that it's going to reboot for an update". Apparently reality just works differently for me than other people. Whatever.
Or you're a liar, because it makes your position look stronger if you lie.
One of the two.
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
No, I actually let those ones through, specifically because I'm aware of the lengths they go through to vet ads.
Do you do the same evaluation of, say, localnewssite.com? I mean do you have a process in place for this or, what?
If you don't give every site you visit the same consideration, you're being a complete jerk to sites you're less careful with. (If your site wasn't co-founded by Jeff Atwood, FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU UP THE ASS! That is my rule, "co-founded by Jeff Atwood!" It is rational as fuck.) If you do, you must spend like... 20 hours a week just deciding which sites to visit and which not to. (Of course you don't, so you're in the "complete jerk" category, but I think I'd fill-in the 'B' option anyway.)
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
"The rule" these days is to use an ad network, and even the best of them (such as Google AdWords) is just not careful enough to keep malicious ads off their network. So I have to keep them off of my computer instead.
Right, and this stick keeps away giraffes.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
If you just block every ad everywhere, how do you even judge this is happening? From one article you read in Forbes years ago?
From the department of anecdata... I don't have an ad blocker on my phone (since I don't do overly much browsing from it and trying to get stuff like that on an iPhone is
), and at least twice a week my attempts to visit /. from my phone result in me getting permanently clickjacked onto a "You've won a $RETAILER gift card" malware site. I've also had the same problem (albeit with less frequency) on ESPN's page and on RedState's blog.And that's not counting how much of my data plan is consumed by the ads, or the amount of auto play video & audio ads that disrupt something I'm doing (whether it's just me being THAT GUY in a McDonald's, or if I'm trying to slip in some checking the sports scores during a boring part of the sermon).
-
@izzion said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
and at least twice a week my attempts to visit /. from my phone result in me getting permanently clickjacked onto a "You've won a $RETAILER gift card" malware site.
Well if SourceForge (apparently?) does it then I support Slashdot would too. They're part of the same shitty site "network".
The bigger question is why the fuck would you visit either of those sites? Slashdot's motto at this point is basically, "Tech News: 3 Days After Everybody Else Reported It!"
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@masonwheeler That's a report that a reputable website, at some point in the past served Malware. No-one denies that this has happened in the past (I personally have had ads on Fark.com hijack my iPad to redirect me to the app-store.)
Again, no-one here is suggesting that malware has not sometimes been served by ad networks
The point in contentions is that THE VAST MAJORITY OF ADS do so. Proving a much weaker statement is uninteresting, because no-one is contesting that much weaker form.
Suffice to say, since neither your link nor the Forbes wesite is currently serving malware, it does not actually meet any of the terms of my challenge.
I don't care a flying fuck if the vast majority don't. All it takes is one. I'm quite willing to disable adblock on specified sites. But I'm not going to browse the web going lalalalaAllIsGood.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@heterodox said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
In 21 years on the Internet, I've never had an ad try to infect my PC with malware.
I have. Maybe 3 times (twice on a Windows PC, once on an iPad). I've been using the Net since it was mostly gopher and Usenet.
And you're seriously advocating for ads having been burned?
???Edit:
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:I have no idea. I use an adblocker.
Got it.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Stop visiting porn sites?
Now lets not go too far.
-
@dcon said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
And you're seriously advocating for ads having been burned?
No I'm advocating for facts, and against alternative facts.
-
@gwowen said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@dcon said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
And you're seriously advocating for ads having been burned?
No I'm advocating for facts, and against alternative facts.
I forgot we were arguing about "vast majority". Morning, caffeine, etcetc.
-
I used to browse a niche website that used Admiral tech to "control their advertising environment". They don't use it anymore, presumably because they realized that as soon as users got one of their dumb popups they just bailed and went somewhere else.
The "publishing" industry thinks paywalls are the solution to all of their problems. I don't know what the actual solution is, but the fact they no longer have a monopoly over the distribution of written words makes me pretty happy.
-
@maciejasjmj said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Back when people pirated music, they were all "well CDs are too expensive." People who steal games will pop-off "I wouldn't have bought the game anyway" at a second's notice. It's just post-hoc rationalization. Because one website infected one computer once, it's ok to block ads on every website forever.
Frankly, what I'd like to see more websites do is to allow you to view the content for a small fee without ads. The CPM rates are shit anyway, one ad impression is what, a few tenths of a cent of profit to the ad space owner? I could easily cover that from my own pocket. Some sites implement that with a monthly fee, but the problem is that with the Internet you generally don't just stick to a single news portal, and paying a monthly fee to each of the portals you occasionally visit gets expensive. Maybe if it was an ad network's feature?
I'd like the choice to be between "paying" for the content by viewing ads, and just paying with money. Instead it's either view ads, don't view the content at all, or use an adblocker which hurts the site owner.
https://contributor.google.com
Would that more sites would be able to support this. It used to be a lot better, but they Google fucked it up and now it's not so good.
-
@kt_ said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@dkf said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
@gurth said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
probably the quickest way to put it out of business — short of, say, firebombing their premises, anyway.
Stop giving me evil ideas about scumbag advertisers.
If you set up a kickstarter, I'll back you!
Here’s a name for it:
FuckFirebomb you, or give me money.
-
...
-
Here's a wild and crazy thought.
The takedown occurred under a rather novel legal theory that Admiral's anti-adblock system is a form of DRM, and therefore blocking it is illegal DRM circumvention under DMCA 1201.
If you look at that idea, you might immediately think "that's crazy!" (And you'd probably be right, because it absolutely is.) But if you think about it a little bit harder, from a devious perspective, you might realize that this is a petard upon which to hoist Admiral. Because if you apply the same line of reasoning, you could easily state the claim that your adblocker is a technical protection device that you use to control access to your web browser! Therefore, any software that circumvents it constitutes a DMCA 1201 violation, therefore Admiral needs to immediately cease all anti-adblock operations.
-
The claim:
@El_Heffe said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
... the vast majority of advertising on the internet is completely fraudulent.
The explanation:
Most traditional advertising (television, newspaper, etc.) is trying to sell an actual product. It might be a really shitty product that isn't worth 1% of the selling price, but at least it's a real product.
The restatement:
Internet advertising is mostly just clickbait. And malware.
Please note: the claim did not say, "the vast majority of advertising on the internet is malware," like some here seem to be arguing against. (Nice strawman, btw.)
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
Would that more sites would be able to support this. It used to be a lot better, but they Google fucked it up and now it's not so good.
For now, there's Patreon (and probably a dozen similar sites). But it's only for monthly stuff and I don't think it really works with small payments...
-
@bb36e said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
I don't think it really works with small payments...
How small is small? I've seen several Patreon pages that have a $1 membership tier.
-
@blakeyrat said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
If you don't give every site you visit the same consideration, you're being a complete jerk to sites you're less careful with. (If your site wasn't co-founded by Jeff Atwood, FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU UP THE ASS! That is my rule, "co-founded by Jeff Atwood!" It is rational as fuck.) If you do, you must spend like... 20 hours a week just deciding which sites to visit and which not to. (Of course you don't, so you're in the "complete jerk" category, but I think I'd fill-in the 'B' option anyway.)
I just don't uncheck the Acceptable Ads option. If a website wants to serve me ads which follow the Acceptable Ads guidelines, then I'm fine with it. And the system is apparently quick to approve. If you want to serve me intrusive, malicious, data-consuming, or disguised ads, then you can fuck yourself; if you don't, then certify yourself in like ten minutes and you'll be automatically unblocked.
-
@masonwheeler said in Is adblocking a DMCA violation?:
How small is small? I've seen several Patreon pages that have a $1 membership tier.
Ooh, I thought you needed to chip in at least a few bucks. Nice!
Portent
