Slashdot Mirror
New Online Ad Technology To Bypass Popup Blockers
RetroGeek writes "Falk eSolutions AG is claiming it can detect and defeat pop-up and pop-under ad blockers. The best quote is that when they detect an ad blocker they will 'replace a pop-up or pop-under ad with what are called "floating" ads, or ads that appear as transparent images over Web-site content.' As far as I am concerned they can place as many transparent images as they want. He probably meant translucent. It should be easy to defeat the detection, after all visit a web site, the pop-up blocker detects a Javascript command, then doesn't run it. Replace this with: the pop-up blocker detects the Javascript command, runs it, then places the result into a bit-bucket. Any Mozilla devs here?" WebGangsta adds "While this may ignite another round of online advertising purchasing, this news doesn't affect anybody who uses a customized HOSTS file to stop the majority of ads from appearing anyway."
when you can block first posts
do adervisters really think this will increase their sales. The user
using these popup blockers have said they don't want them, to try to
defeat them is only going to make many users hate you, and your product
I would see that if it is a legit company they just might see their sales
drop from the angry net users. For those who have not disabled javascript
this just might be the nail that gets them to disable it.
One of the many things we learned about the advertising idiocy during the dotcom boom was that you can't just spew your message everywhere. Random, untargetted advertising is what gave us Spank the Monkey and Win $20 (someone feel free to bring up the Microsoft ad I'm looking at now, not touching that one with a 10-foot stick).
These people are trying to serve ads to people actively trying to block them. Oh yeah, that's brilliant.
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
Maybe what they are talking about is different, but there is already software to block floating ads. Just search google and software such as this and this claim to block in-your-face floating ads. I have never used these and probably wouldn't since they cost money and google is doing a fine job for me.
No kidding.
I wonder if there's a way to block those annoying float ads. But that's a little more complicated than blocking popups. Might be a nice emerging market to get into...
This signature has Super Cow Powers
I have an easy way to defeat their technology.
Every time I see a pop-up that defeats my pop-up blocking, first I'll for damned sure never buy that product. In addition, I will never go to the hosting website again. And I'll make damned sure they know why.
There is no topic on the internet that can be served by only one site.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
The next wave will be full fledged interrupt ads on most major sites. Already a couple high-profile companies are using them and more are sure to follow.
Advertising is and will kill the Internet. Out of the ashes will be born something new and better.
I just wish they'd hurry up and get done fucking everyone in the ass so we can start over fresh.
Fresh as a summers day.
They're likely talking about layers.. which is something that Adblock already deals with. (along with Flash, images and custom paths - i.e. block anything in the directory */ads/*).
Just another reason to use Firefox/Mozilla.
If you visit a webpage with numerous popups/popunders, will this software "stack" all of the popups on top of each other, thereby creating image chaos? Or will it just rotate the images?
Ive been using google's toolbar. it does occasionally miss some popups, but i noticed a site that put a window look-alike in the middle of the page i was trying to veiw.
-foxxz
Color me ignorant, but what exactly does everythingisnt.com have to do with customized HOSTS files?
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
I wonder if I can copyright my peaceful desktop, then use the DMCA to sue these clowns for circumventing my copyright protection.
Would be nice though wouldn't it?
superman runs linux
... or use the AdBlock extension with Mozilla Firefox. I find it to be more effective than the host file (since it can make more specific blocks).
When you outlaw popup blocking blockers only outlaw popup blocking blockers will block popup blocking blockers.
http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic/
Here's an example of this style of anti-popup-blocker advertisement. This site, which is very useful by the way, will not "work" if javascript is not enable or ads are not shown.
I haven't tested this in other browsers, but this system is pretty neat (awful?)... it changes itself so its hard to detect the functions and block them.
One successful tactic in sales is to be annoying. Almost everyone hates telemarketing, yet if nobody ever bought anything from a telemarketer, it would not be profitable and nobody would do it. Same with spam.
This is a problem with technologies that allow your ad to be delivered to millions of people cheaply. If even a tiny fraction of people respond, it won't matter that you annoyed the hell out of the other 99%.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Sue them under the DMCA claiming that they are bypassing a security feature that you installed to block ads?
I've seen this already. Sliding windows across the text, with a "close" button that's the only thing I will ever click. When will these advertising bozos figure out that if I'm going to all that trouble to block their ads, then I'm not in their target market anyway?
Even the spammers are smart enough to figure that one out. I've received about a spam a month since I changed my domain registration email address from "domains@" to "domspam@". Before I changed over, I was receiving one or two dozen a day, even though most bounced when the account's purposely low quota filled up.
I guess popup blockers have become too easy to use. Now that my mother-in-law, queen of "click anything", can install it, the spamvertizers have to find another way to infiltrate her system.
I'm looking forward to a future release of Opera with "pop-in blocking" built in.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
This surely depends on Java, Javascript, or ActiveX. Since I don't use any of them I couldn't care less what kind of ads they think they are displaying.
Free Popup Blocker:
7 /uninstall_flash_player.exe (Uninstaller)
http://www.mozilla.org/
http://toolbar.google.com (If you use IE)
Replacement HOSTS file:
http://www.everythingisnt.com/hosts.html
Tiny HTTP Server to respond to all those HOSTS entries:
http://www.pyrenean.com/edexter.php
Flash Remover:
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/ts/flash
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ (for Mozilla)
"TK-421, why aren't you at your post?"
If you encounter one of these ads, send feedback to the people who run the site. Play dumb and pretend your web browser choked on them. Say that you tried to look at their site, but this huge ad appeared covering the text and you couldn't read anything or make the ad go away, and tell them that you gave up and left and won't be coming back in future if they can't make their web site work.
1) Intelligent popup blocking by mozilla (do not open any unrequested popups -- there is also enough customization).
2) "Block images from this server" -- blanket nuking.
These are the "extensions" to mozilla and firefox that are very powerful
3) Adblock -- block images based on a URL pattern. Very powerful and easy to specify what to block.
4) Flash block -- block flash elements (even something like flash click to view)
5) Nuke Anything -- if something comes up on your screen, you can remove it "after the fact". For example, if you want to read an interesting article on some celebrity with a stupid image, you can remove the image very easily using this.
At the end of the day, the end user should be able to see what he/she wants to read and view. If the sites persist in doing annoying things or refuse to serve some pages to people that have an advanced browser, I believe it is better to avoid those pages.
S
This should be moderated funny ... I believe the poster was trying to post in the previous article 'Microsoft Patents Timed Button Presses'
... hehe
Hilarious indeed
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
I got a huge surprise the other day. I always browse with mozilla, and the only anti-ad extension I installed was Flash click-to-play. There are a couple of sites taht I've been frequently lately, and they had no ads or anything. So, I thought they were good netizens and even donated to one of them.
Then I was stuck in a lab with IE only. I went to these sites, and they had popups and those transparent ads that place themselves over the page. It was crazy how much advertising there was. I wish that I could take my money back.
Mozilla so far gets rid of 99% of these annoying ads without causing a problem. But the advertisers are bound to catch on soon. I can only hope that mozilla stays in the lead.
Of course you could do the less rich, IE only (what isn't?) Notepad Pop-Up
Forrester Research Inc. projected that in 2002, about 15 percent of consumers already used a pop-up blocker. Apprendi said Falk estimates that number at about 20 percent today.
So what's the big deal? Chances are, the 20% minority are the types who are the least receptive to advertising anyway. Even if you were to circumvent blocking technology and force them to watch the ads, they're unlikely to go out and buy the product. You're just making them even more annoyed, and less likely to spend their money.
Because of the pop-up blockers, those who view online ads areYet they do it anyway! Remarkably obtuse people. Of course, I know the reason for it. It's all about eyeballs and the more they can prove they are shoving their stuff in front of more eyeballs, the more money they get. That's why this is so amoral: They don't care how anyone reacts, or that that are despised, or that it causes business problems for the advertisers. They just want mo' money, and that's the end of their thought process.
Buh bye, new technology. It won't work. I will defeat it. I will refuse to view ads on the Web. Don't yammer at me with the tired old whine, "But how else are I gonna pay for my web siiiiiiite?" I dunno, Sparky, figure something else out. I will never allow advertising on my web site. It doesn't belong on the Web.
The Web is about people to people communiciation. Just because a bunch of greedheads decided to use it to make money doesn't subvert the purpose of the Web. As for the endless war against pop-ups: They lose. Every time.
No, transparency includes all ranges from totally transparent to not entirely opaque. Translucency is more properly used when light but not details are carried through. A translucent floating image would scatter or effectively blur the content behind the image making it unreadable.
A tinted window is still transparent, but the windows in public restrooms are generally translucent.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
And, let me tell YOU... I'm hung like a horse and always ready to go.
To all who visit the dilbert website regularly, has anyone seen that floating ad that blocks the last panel of the strip? I have seen it about 5 times and I read the site daily. I use NS7.2 and have not seen a popup ad anywhere since I started using it. I assume this ad is some sort of CSS. This type of advertising is not pop up, but it is certainly annoying. What's to stop other websites from doing something similar? It might require more than pasting some banner code in your page, but still...
No. I think the correct term is semitransparent.
This site, which is very useful by the way, will not "work" if javascript is not enable or ads are not shown.
Sounds to me like they're taking a good approach. They're not attempting to circumvent anyone's ad-blocking software--anyone who doesn't want to see their ads, doesn't have to.
But they're providing a valuable service, and they deserve to be compensated. If you don't want to pay for it by letting them display their banner ads, then you don't get to use their site.
I see it on Blues News and other sites already. They pop up over the content.. and Mozilla et al will not get rid of them.
At least they have a quick Close button for now.
I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
Ever wonder why it takes your system 10 minutes to boot? Kuz your hosts file is hundreds of entries long, that's why. It's better to use Proxomitron;
http://www.proxomitron.info/
Custom filters, etc. Also, use spybot search and destroy's immunize option. It roxors.
Also, do note that any attempt to force advertising on users will ultamatly fail so long as the computer lives on as a free medium and those advertisements annoy people enough that they want to be rid of them.
Candy-Coated Knowledge
"And I'll bust your TraceBuster with my TraceBuster-buster"...
Are you influenced by commercials on the TV? Of course you are.
If you could choose, would you choose to have the commercials disabled? Of course you would.
With this reasoning advertisers can safely assume that even annoying ads pay off.
The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
Mozilla/Firefox/etc that support CSS ad blocking can block these floating things. I've done it. Here's the addition I made for the particular ads I saw:
td > div#floatpop, td > div#closebox {
display: inline !important;
}
My suspicion is since Active X files won't run on the Mac and Safari blocks all pop ups when enabled that this won't be a problem for those of us in the Apple hugging category :)
Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
Privoxy can already block these with a couple judicious regexps, and it shouldn't be any trouble at all for Mozilla to block these as well. If you want to block floaters in advance of this tech being adopted by every unscrupulous marketeer in existence, try going to Kompas (Indonesian news site). They're filled with them, but a few rules should clean 'em up.
Marketroids have to learn that you catch a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar. At this point, nstead of being in any way interested in the product, the user just gets annoyed and tries to find a way to make the advertisement go away...or goes to a different site.
There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
There are many widely publicized methods on webmaster message boards. Some involve opening up a fake pop-up window first, and then rapidly opening a second, actual ad window. This fools some blockers, such as the Norton one.
Another tactic that is becoming more and more popular is using layer ads, which float over the browser window. Since this is not a new window, the blocker doesn't stop it. This is much like the spam game, where the spammers are constantly coming up with new methods of foiling filters, and the filter authors are trying to stop these new spam methods.
"Over the years, various companies have claimed to have a way to sidestep their online ads from being blocked," InterMute CEO Ed English said in a statement. "History has shown [that our] AdSubtract has no problem keeping up with ever-changing online ad technologies."
He sounds quite pleased with what his company's doing, but in reality they're not "keeping up with technology" -- they're finding ever-sneakier ways to push ads into people's faces despite their explicit objection, and despite the fact that they take extra steps to be rid of them.
It's like he eats shit for a living and sports a shit-eating grin.
td > div#floatpop, td > div#closebox {
display: none !important;
}
Anyway, just add the "td > div#floatpop, td > div#closebox" in with the rest of the rules. I should probably submit it for inclusion in the next update.
Chances re good they are simply checking the results of a pop-up call, and if the pop-up doesn't exist they create or display a layer (DHTML, CSS, whatever) over the content. Chances are it'll move to attract attention, and either close in a short period of time or allow you to click a link/button to close it.
That's fine by me. If I am annoyed I can simply close the browser window or tab that contains it and it will go away as well. Pop-up ads don't go away when the window that called them disappears, and that is the primary reason for using a pop up ad.
The problem with making a fix for this issue is that it's a simple arms race. The discussion was long and hard on bugzilla about how to overcome websites that simply diaplayed a message stating that if the pop-ups didn't work they weren't going to display the content.
The ultimate decision was to let it alone. People will walk away from those sites naturally - adding yet another layer of filtering, or one of many other solutions simply slows the browser and doesn't actually provide much return on investment for the average user.
In this case I will stop going to those sites that annoy me. Others will not, and it may be that layers will be the advertising choice. But advertisers have to decide whether they want an ad that is always on, but off to the side/top/bottom/whatever, or whether they want to bi in the face of the viewer for a moment while they search for the button to close the ad. There are pros and cons to each method, but I suspect that most people don't pay any more attention to the ad than is necessary to close it.
Content providers like Salon have the right idea, IMHO, they openly say they exist because of ads, and you can choose to view ads for free content for a day, or buy a subscription. They don't hide the content behind a moving ad, or make you jump through more than one ad.
It'll all even out over time through attrition.
-Adam
I've stopped paying attention to everything. I never RTFA and I never ever click any links. I even ignore dialogs from my local machine at this point.
Some sites are starting to hardcode IP addresses, in which case the hosts file is useless.
Personally I think that there should be an generic framework for transforming any resource locator for all popular protocols.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
It appears that flash that it's appearing in middle of the screen is loaded from http://c.as-eu.falkag.net/. Quite easy to remove annoyances with Adblock (Mozilla)
http://archonon.sytes.net/
Sit there and complain about it, but the reason you're able to do things like read news for free online, perform fast google searches, and even use some software without paying for it is because companies pay for these services with advertisements. Remove the advertisements and you can kiss all of this goodbye. I'm not saying we should support the more obnoxious approaches to advertising, but our demand for "free software" and "free services" requires that the people running them find a way to make a living. Obviously I'm not a supporter of spam, I'm talking about something entirely different here. We live in a material world and I am a material girl...or boy.
Just tried Opera on your link. Popups were blocked and the site worked fine.
- I live the greatest adventure anyone could possibly desire. - Tosk the Hunted
Things like adblock are based on the ability not to load things that lie under some certain path's, for instance /ads/
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be pretty easy to bypass things like adblock?
Say you put all the ads in a folder called, lets say "e4FFyz3kk1j8r". Then every night you let a perl script rename the folder at random, and then change all the references in all the html's, php's or whatever's.
Sooner or later someone is bound to try it, so I think we should already now start thinking in new directions.
The belief in a biblical god is an ignorant one
Why reply to a title and fuckin waste time replying...
One thing I learned (before adblock fixed everything) is that you should make sure that you have a webserver running on 127.0.0.1 that returns a blank page when it can't find the page (the 404 page), as this allows blank whitespace in place of 404 not found errors. It also speeds up browsing, too.
Fellowship 9/11
Seek out someone who responded to an unsolicited ad by purchasing something and murder them.
They are always talking about solutions, but aren't they the problem?
These people are trying to serve ads to people actively trying to block them. Oh yeah, that's brilliant.
...there's a whole lot of people setting up blockers (or have blockers put up for them, which won't be able to dodge these new ones) because they are the kind that get easily tempted. When they're calm and collected, they want to block ads. But if they see an ad, they simply MUST have it. It's amazing how many people you can catch that way.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
To all who visit the dilbert website regularly, has anyone seen that floating ad that blocks the last panel of the strip? I have seen it about 5 times and I read the site daily.
No - but that's because all the comics I'm interested are harvested for me every morning by the dailystrips scripts run on a cron job on my machine and nicely organized and indexed ready for my reading later. In theory, anything at all published on the web is retrievable by some method, processable and automatically tidied up before you view it.
If advertising ever gets bad enough that the web pages aren't really usable or readable without some extra processing, there will be a market for advanced filtering of whatever HTML/XHTML/XML is being used to extract the useful stuff. If that is integrated into a browser, then you might even not notice the muck. Or you could just go back to links/lynx/w3m or whatever.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
I seem to remember that mp3.com and some other sites used flash "floating" ads that worked just this way. They would pop up in the window, or fly across, or whatever. Some of them were actually kinda neat - until about the 50th time you saw the same one.
this ugly site found some way to defeat the popup-killer in my mozilla :/
It must be pretty damn hard to get pop adverts into a text browser...
Just to add to this. AdBlock can block based on a regular expression. So I block
:)
http://*.doubleclick.net/*
Which means any javascript, ads, images, flash from doubleclick is blocked. If the 'floating transparent image' is served from doubleclick, it will not show up either
Or you can do something sophsitcated like blocking
http://www.somesite.com/ads/*
Which blocks everything under the 'ads' directory for that site but loads the rest of the site normally.
WebElements
As said before, there will always be alternatives that don't do such things. Boycott the ones who do.
The real solution goes beyond ad blocking software. It lies in a willingness to completely boycott any site willing to allow advertising of this style. When enough of your readership complains and walks away, and your hits drop astronomically, you definitely re-evaluate your policy (especially since your advertisers do too).
I say let those sites that want to cater to sheep serve up as much as they want and get paid by advertisers to ignore the desires of their readers. I will get my data from sites that listen to their readers over their advertisers. (Reminds me of www.techreport.com which once had an advertiser whose animated image seriously sucked system resources. Readers posted complaints and the advertiser was asked to revise the image. Win/Win because the readers got a simple unobtrusive ad, the site got the advertising cash flow, and the advertiser adjusted to something that actually appealed to those readers who might be interested).
I was taking one day at a time, but then several days got together and ambushed me. (from a Rhymes with Orange comic)
There are some Active X web components that will run on the mac, but you have to use IE. Even on windows, that is the only way to run Acitve X web stuff. Mozilla is immune on all platforms.
And in the first place its obviously not active x! so it could work on safari and mozilla.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Sometimes I open up IE on my gfs machine just to see ;)
how bad popups suck. Guess I wont need that anymore
superman runs linux
and your No mean "Keep trying in as many annoying ways as possible until I say Yes just to get you out of my hair, and then use that moment of weakness as justification for never accepting another No from me again."
Whenever I hear about stuff like this, I always think of that really bad movie The Big Hit, starring Mark Wahlberg. There's a scene where one guy is trying to trace another guy's phone call and they have a conversation something like:
1 - Don't even try to trace this call. I have caller ID blocker.
2 - Oh yeah. I have caller ID blocker-blocker
1 - Well, I also have caller ID blocker-blocker-blocker
2 - And I have caller ID blocker-blocker-blocker-blocker!
So, I guess all we need now is a pop-up blocker-blocker-blocker....
When violence rules the world outside / And the headlines make me want to cry / It's not the time to just keep quiet
HOSTS was never meant to have 1000's of listings. I can't think of anything stupider than to sequentially search a huge text file for each outgoing tcp request.
Since you're all linux nerds, and swear up and down you use nothing but linux on the desktop, why would you even fuck with such a thing?
Throw your hosts into an ldap and install (and use) libnss_ldap.so. That'd be slightly more efficient since of course, you do have nscd running, right?
Or use something like privoxy, which works well, though I don't care for proxy servers. Mozilla's pop-up blocking works well too.
Gack, leave HOSTS alone. This is the 21st century for fuck sakes. Run a dns cache/server like pdnsd or BIND and block them out there.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
PORN ALERT
A coward will try to make my argument disappear. A man will express his opposing view to my face.
how long will it take until there is a law which prohibits adblocking???
stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
Sorry but what's a... Popup? I use Mozilla so I don't wouldn't know.
Ah yes, I can feel searing hate of the die hard MS internet explorer fans at me...Toasty.
Konqueror was 3.2.2, Firefox was 0.8.
Heh, I use Opera (identify as Opera too) and it works for me: because I've turned Javascript off. They use Javascript to detect browser type so they can't figure out which browser I have and let me through. And contrary to the original comment, the site works quite well with Javascript off.
Install OSX, problem solved.
Is there a way to get ...target=blank requests to open up in a NEW TAB instead of IN A WHOLE NEW WINDOW? Too many sites needlessly have a target =blank next to links, and drives me batty.
That's probably the most hypocrisy I've ever read in one comment. Your own racism shines through quite clearly, as well as your ignorance. Funny part is, I bet you're a US resident, probably a teenager. Be thankful for your freedoms here, and God Bless America!
I wonder when one of the pop-up blocker companies are going to start filing suit under the DMCA for circumvention of their blocker. It would be nice to see a REAL use of the DMCA for once instead of a big business scare tactic.
the popup system I build for our sites beats every popup blocker except Opera i've tested so far ;)
https://secure.easyinternetbusiness.com/sites/Inte rnet_Marketing_Bootcamp2/
evil maybe, but beating someone elses technology is kinda fun =p
In Soviet Russia, the pop-up blocks you! ;)
It was the extension that you added to Mozilla that did the job. Not Mozilla itself.
IE has tons of plug-ins you can use too but you were probably too busy congradulating yourself on cool you were using Mozilla.
Claims of "defeating" pop-up blockers are completely false allegations. It is just a fancy spin on the very simple fact that pop-up blockers, good ones at least, cannot be defeated, and advertisers have now opted for AN ALTERNATIVE form of advertisement, which is thru floating DHTML layers. The fact that they can detect the presence of some sort of pop-up blocking is irrelevant, this has always been possible in a few lines of code. Consider those floating ads as glorified, more interactive regular image or static flash banners, the key point is that they can only live within the current document, and GO AWAY as soon as either 1) the user clicks on the close button if they choose to be wise and provide one or 2) go to another site after having been annoyed by said ad.
This is nothing but a spin.
On the other hand, what was so powerful about pop-up and pop-unders is that they could spawn with or without the user's instant knowledge and keep spawning more of themselves, often defeating users' repeated attempts at closing them. Well-designed pop-up chains could keep the user clicking for minutes!
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices
What would happen if everyone clicked on the ad, but didn't buy anything? Could that drive the company trying to sell stuff out of buisness by forcing them to pay incredible ammounts of money to the marketing company? Granted, we'd be left with only marketing companies, until the real companies realized that they aren't making money by advertizing like this online....
Just a thought
The point is that I automatically ignore banner ads, as do a huge percentage of Internet users. It's even easier because Mozilla lets you turn off GIF animation, killing off the flashing crap. You can even choose which Flash things you want to see with the Flash Click to View plugin. If they want to enforce a no-block policy, that's their right. It just seems strange that they would invest so much effort in defending a semi-useless advertising technique. But hey, if someone's paying them for it, great. Like the site says, I don't want to pay money if I can pay with ad impressions. Especially if I don't notice them anyway.
Off topic, but there are some odd comments in the HTML source for their pages. Here's a quote:
We may not be happy with Opera software, but we also believe it wrong to hack someone elses software. If "window.opera" returns a true value and "Opera" is not part of the userAgent string reported by the browser, we know that Opera has be cracked.
Whaaa? I thought Opera gave you the option of changing the user agent through a GUI dialog. How is this "hacking?"
Using the firefox + adblock + flash + proxomitron seems to work just fine with the sites I've been referred to so far
/ only, ads are the textual google ads.
http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic
http://dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/ only ads again, are google text ads
http://www.kompas.com/ dear heaven look at all the flash that wants to play, (flash click to view stops them all).
any other examples to try ?
Bugs Bunny was right.
Sorry, people don't want to lose complete functionality of their computer using a faggoty machine running a faggoty operating system with roots based in a faggoty hippy philosophy that honestly doesn't work in the "real world".
a long time ago i think i was useing mozilla 1.3 alpha and i was going around lots odd forums and one led to another untill i got to a forum that had an ad that was large enoff to cover lots of the page but you could still see something like 10 words of the actual page. in smallsh print the ad said something like 'this page has found you use a pop up blocker or have disabled javascript plese disable your pop up blocker and enable javascript in order to take this ad away and to show the content below.' I think the ad was for some free computer thing that just gets your email and spams you to death
A politicalsite http://www.everythingisnt.com/ when I was just looking for some TECHNICAL help.
Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this prevent you from seeing the relevant content on the page? Who in their right mind would use a product that obscures that which you want the users to see?
How's this? :)
Would be nice to have one that worked the same way SPAM blockers do. When someone got an annoying ad they could just submit the IP to a central service that would then distribute to anyone that used it.
Since I always seem to be the guy they call when their computer stops working, and I can't seem to say no to friends and family, I have been forced to adopt a new policy after the wave of new-style spyware over the last month.
This because I spent 20 hours cleaning up spyware infested computers in one week. These new varieties run in god mode and cannot be removed with automated anti-spyware utilities & even windows reversion won't fix it.
I will no longer fix their computers unless the browser is switched to Mozilla 1.6. IE can remain on the computer but can only be used under supervision to access windowsupdate.microsoft.com. Mozilla is a drop-in replacement for IE and Outlook Express, and I feel it is stable and smooth enough for any of them to use.
I'll clean up their machine one last time & help them install Mozilla, but that's it. If it breaks again due to unsupervised use of IE or Outlook, I am not working on it, further than telling them to "run your recovery disks" or "take it back to Dell." I don't have enough time in my life to deal with it.
I did four such cleanup/Mozilla installs in the last week & they are all as happy as hell. To be honest, I think their having such easy access to free computer work from me has made them complacent in their browsing habits, but they are cleaning up their acts right now.
A few national ISP like earthlink are shipping the client software with pop-up software..
More will follow. So there are people with pop-up blockers that didn't download and install them.
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see.
if you block their pop-up ads, their spyware/adware will surely get you later. No need to install their malware, it gets installed automatically.
JS IRNOR.M anyone? Really nasty malware I found on my system that NAV and others could not detect. It uses HTML and Javascript to install itself from a web page. Lookt2me was another one, the latest version could not be removed, it did pop-ups and destroyed my TCP/IP stack after I removed it. Forcing a reinstall of the OS.
You really want to get rid of pop-ups forever? Reformat the hard drive, install Linux and Mozilla/Firefox and avoid sites that require IE or Windows in order to work.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Opera 7.23 already blocks popups.
File -> Preferences -> Windows -> Pop-ups
-AC
Your logic is bullsh%t. (you can pretend it's 'sophistry' if the word offends you). Commercials on tv and spam on the 'net are two entirely different things.
Commercials on TV produce revenue as an offset for us to see shows essentially for free.
Spammers are NOT providing ANY any services to us in return for their spam. If we were receiving free connections or the cost of providing you with the cost of upgrading your connection to broadband over dialup, that would be different - and there are other types of services which put ads around your screen while you are connected. That's the choice of the person connecting. So those of us who have been on for ten, fifteen, twenty years are suddenly gaing what for this garbage? Nothing. Until they provide some type of service (e.g., tv shows) there can be no comparisons of tv ads and spam.
The parent claiming otherwise should be required to pay (ala FearFactor) for all of one Slashdot-day (all material in all forums) to be printed out hardcopy, shredded, and forced to be eaten with sour milk for breakfast - until it's gone. And anythings which comes up will still need to be reconsumed.
This type of confusion is exactly the type of garbage spammers and related bodies (e.g., DMA - Direct Marketing Association) want to instill so the issue of penalties appears to be harsh because they'll police themselves.
It uses javascript to check the ads to make sure the size of the image is not too small (as replacement images often are) and the display properties are maintained (not set hidden with CSS).
It can't actually detect if an ad was replaced by a blank image by a proxy server, but it'll know if the ad is the wrong size.
Solution? More sophisticated ad blockers should attempt to match image size to a URL pattern by fetching it a few times and seeing what it gets back. Then it should autogenerate the replacement content with that size.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
That's why there are diferent types of ads to be bought;
some are priced by impressions, so I might pay for 700K downloads of my ad image.
Some are priced by click-throughs so I might pay for a 100K clicks.
Some are paid by a commission on sales generated durring the visit after a click-through.
There is advantages to each as well as disadvantages no matter which side of the fence your on. Few people realy object to seeing well targeted, tastefull ads, almost everyone objects to tacky, intrusive shot-guns ads.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Pop up ads are annoying as fuck, but what pisses me off more than anything else is that most ad servers are slow as fuck and a lot of websites are coded to load the ads FIRST, then the site. I paid for "ads free" version of mail.com, because their ads were so damn annoying, only to find that every time I log on, I have to wait 10 seconds from the fucking banner ad on the main page to load before I can login. Goto www.darkhorizons.com and see what I mean, wasted time.
"Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
I've been doing this sort of stuff for a long time. This company neither has anything new or impressive. Heck you think this is annoying? You should see some of the stuff I've written, far more impressive than this stuff. Sheesh... There's a whole windowing API in IE that hardly anyone is even using and most of the popup blockers don't even know it exists.... ahhh fun. if you can pop up on every version of ie since 5.0.0 then who cares if you miss out on the Mozilla, Safari and popup blocked crowd? I won't give too much away in fear of it falling into the wrong hands (ie ones that don't pay me) before the popup blockers get their heads around it.
What if we slashdotted a site that relies on popups for income and have expenses based on their bandwidth? And also that we all slashdot the site without downloading ads? What if we do this every day?
Perhaps they will get huge bills for bandwidth? And no income from the ad companies?
Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.
Bah to javascript, it's more trouble than it's worth.
"Banner Blocking Detected You have been brought to this page because it was detected that your web browser, software on your computer or some other event is preventing some or all of our banner ads from being displayed on our pages correctly. If you are not using a utility to block banners, you may have been inadvertently brought here because a banner image did not load correctly. Please make sure you have enabled images and disable any ad blocking software then try again.
If you sincerely want a banner free experience on our site and are willing to help support our efforts directly, we do offer a paid subscription option. This option is especially useful for educators who would like to use our site in their classroom without the distractions banner ads create.
Banner Blocking Manifesto
We understand that you may find banner advertising annoying. This website, however, is not sponsored or produced by some faceless rich corporation or public entity. This site is the product of the hard labor of one individual and his family. Producing and delivering the content on this site is expensive. If we are to continue to make the resources on this website available to individuals like yourself free of charge, we must be allowed to use banner advertising as a means of paying the costs of maintaining this website.
The relationship between the web content provider (in this case us) and the content consumer (you) must be a symbiotic relationship. If small web publishers like us are to continue to be able to provide access to useful information free of charge, we must get something in return. In this case it is the ability to display and earn revenue off of banner advertising.
Kenneth Barbalace
Creator of EnvironmentalChemistry.com
How to Disable Ad Blocking Software
There are scores programs and services on the market that offer banner ad blocking abilities. As such we will only focus on a few of the most common programs.
Symantec Norton Internet Security: If you are using Symantec's "Norton Internet Security" software, banner blocking may have been turned on without your knowledge. You can turn off ad blocking in Symantec NIS by opening Norton Internet Security. In the main window, double-click Ad Blocking and then uncheck "Ad Blocking".
ZoneAlarm Pro firewall: If you are using the firewall ZoneAlarm pro, you can turn off ad blocking under the tab "Privacy" and then slide the "Ad Blocking" control to the off position.
AdSubtract: If you ar using AdSubtract, right mouse click on the AdSubtract icon in your task tray (looks like an orange circle with a plus and minus sign) and select "Disable AdSubtract".
WebWasher: If you are using WebWasher, right mouse click on the WebWasher icon in your task tray (looks like a blue circle with a white "W" and then select "Deactivate standard filter".
Related Resources TechTV - Rage Against the Ad-Blocking Machines
"Ask SlashDot" article
Steal this Site"
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
I like Salon's approach. If you are not a member, you can get a day's membership by choosing to watch a brief commercial. A site could easily deal with pop-up blockers by presenting a screen inviting the user to request to see the ads. That would make it a requested screen, and the blocker would not trigger. If you don't want to do that, they are free to withhold their content.
On the other hand, I'm not going to futz with my pop-up blocker settings trying to get a site to work. If a site refuses to load, I just figure that it's a buggy site and I never go back.
Bah host files to block ads, Jebus your stuck in the 90's. All the Kewl CiDs are using hacked CSS sheets. Even Mozilla.org has example CSS sheets to kill ads mine even works on slashdo^h^h^h .. quick run they are on to us.
The reason why tv ads are not comparable in their annoyingness is because tv is not interactive.
Pop-up ads get in the way.
I'll be honest: I'm not annoyed by getting redirected to an ad page I have to watch before getting to the content of interest. Sure, I'd rather not watch it, but I think it's reasonable.
To make the analogy to tv work, you'd have to posit some sort of tv ad where the ad changes the functions of the buttons on the remote, to take advantage of you trying to change the channel, but instead pressing a button that allows insurance salesman into your home instantaneously.
They probably detect whether the ad's content was accessed by the user, either by tracking things on the web server or with JavaScript. If that becomes commonplace, ad-blockers will just download the content and then discard it.
Now, what would be a really nifty trick is if they manage to detect that lynx blocks pop-up ads and put a translucent ad on top of the lynx text.
Popups seem to have got themselves the same respect/FUD as computer viruses these days - hasn't anyone even on Slashdot stopped just for a minute to think about how they actually work?
It's very simple. Popups don't force their way into your computer; rather, your computer chooses to display them. This usually happens when your web browser downloads the source code for a web page, and that code contains a request that says: Please open a new browser window on the user's desktop. It's then up to the web browser to actually go ahead and display that popup.
They work in the same way as nearly all viruses: rather than force their way into a computer, your computer merely chooses to execute a set of instructions - although there are exceptions here, as some viruses exploit security holes to 'trick' their way in, which is why we employ other mechanisms such as using a firewall to block all incoming connection requests to make their job harder for them.
The real solution to popups is quite simple, and it's based on prevention is better than cure. Rather than allowing your computer choose to display a popup, and then putting effort into finding ways to "block" it, simply have your computer not open them in the first place.
Don't believe me? Fine - try a text based browser - something that doesn't even know about window systems, such as lynx, or links. Perhaps try running it on a system that doesn't even have a windowing system installed and just has one virtual console running. You should then find that most websites have a pretty hard time opening any popup windows on your 80x25 text-based screen!
Okay, fine, using text-based browsers isn't exactly an ideal solution to anyone, but it does prove the point that by far the most reliable way to "block" popups is to simply use a browser that has no knowledge of how to open anything other than it's main window on your system. Since there are already several Free Software / Open Source web browser implementations out there, there's nothing stopping anyone with plenty of time on their hands from going through and removing all such code.
I unfortunately don't have the time or the necessary C++ skills (most of them seem to be written in C++, rather than C) to do this, and so I find that using Mozilla 1.6 (or later) and selecting Edit - Preferences - Privacy & Security - Popup Windows and ticking the Block unrequested popup windows box is good enough. It's interesting to note that sometimes clicking on a link will cause a web page to open itself in a new window, but the advertisers don't seem to have managed to exploit this so far.
I wish there was something similiar in Firefox! My employeer's virus scanner (McAfee) can restrict sites by IP address or URL.
A problem is that these days, some web sites (SlickDeals.net) are doing some things that causes valid pages to fail to load because of my "blocked sites". I usually get a "Cannot find server or DNS Error" because I've blocked various ad sites.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
All technical details aside, I think the most interesting of this "ad-war" is that it leads to development of technologies blocking ads, new circumventions for this technologies by the ad-makers and so forth. But who benefits?
The browser companies (admitted, mozilla doesn't get much money by selling software, but opera etc. do) and the ad-technology-"inventors".
Where are the real products? Were is the benefit for the population as a whole? I have to see it yet. One of those cases where the free market went mad.
Those X10 Camera pop-ups are annoying as hell...but my boss just purchased some for surveillance of his business. I hate to admit it, but they work great. I suppose that's evidence that if a product is really useful, people will still buy it no matter what the company's ad tactics are like.
Every windows user is a sadomasochist.
If its the ad-blocking hosts file you want, its here.
No pop-ups, pop-unders, pop-sideways, javascript or flash junk can ruin my browsing. Only images I see are the ones I want to.
but when is one i'll hit my back button and never return to the site. Annoying your users isn't anyway to get repeat (or first time for that matter) business.
People (sellers) have gone on record as saying they never saw any business because of these methods, yet when they employed Googles addwords the could register a big change almost at once. Because Googles adds are mostly relevant and never annoying.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
The big problem with this war is that there is so much collateral damage.
With each measure people take to block the popups and other types of advertisement, they also end up blocking content and applications that they need.
Once, people thought the browser will become the "application environment". The latest W3C inventions makes that more viable every day. But, now look what we've _removed_ from the environment:
1) Dialog Boxes: Gone. You can usually still use a javascript alert, but you can't prompt the user with a dialog box anymore, a primitive UI component.
2) Random things broken: "Adblock" css and stuff like that, which blocks images and iframes when the relative path to those things starts with "ad"? So, if slashdot's preferences were called "adjustments", that would get killed.
Sure, people can sometimes turn these things off, but more and more often, people are having these things installed without even knowing they're there (like millions will when XP SP 2 comes out).
This whole situation is rapidly making the web a much less hospitable environment for applications.
Just disable Javascript and Java in Mozilla (plus activex and active scripting if using IE), and you won't EVER have a popup/popunder.
Not only do you not have to deal with stupid ads and crap that websites foist upon you, you're far safer, as most browser exploits require javascript or java to run.
For the occasional site that refuses to render without javascript, enable it if you want to view that site, and then disable it again.
Or if using Mozilla/Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox, use Shimoda Hiroshi's "Tabbrowser Extension", and create a custom tab for that site that has java/javascript enabled, and keep it disabled for everyone else.
There is a file: /etc/host in linux
c:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\HOSTS in windows
just add entries like this:
127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
For every ad site you see (maybe keep ads.osdn.com). This will change every ad for a Not Found message if you have Apache Server running (unless your machine is an ad site) or nothing if you don't have a web server.
-- When did Ignorance Become a Point of View?
1) Try and push adverts on people who dont want to see them and who know how to use ad-blockers
2) ??
3) Profit?
No! it bloody well doesnt work! collecting underpants ins one thing, living through 100's of 1),2),3) Profit jokes on slashdot is another, but this is total crack induced stupidity! At what point does that business model make any sense? how much of the most poor quality shit do you have to smoke before your brain is so totally mind-fucked that it can bend the logic round and say "yes this is a good idea and will not piss people off at your company"!?
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Why is it that everytime I look at their name, I see Fake Solutions.
Actually that seems to be a pretty simple question.
J
If I remember correctly, while X10 has a really cool product, it was by doing annoying adverts that caused them to falter. So then, what is there to cause marketing types to believe that by circumventing what is for all intents a "do not spam" measure they will sell more of their clients' wares?
This sig no verb.
Use Mozilla and all your popup problems will be solved.
Please flee in terror in an orderly manner.
While this may ignite another round of online advertising purchasing, this news doesn't affect anybody who uses a customized HOSTS file to stop the majority of ads from appearing anyway.
Since mozilla displays its connection errors in modal windows instead of showing error placeholders like IE, i can't use a modified lmhosts.
Please vote for bug 28586 to get this fixed
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
Gosh, you must be a hit at get-togethers....
"Well actually Susie, blah blah blah-de-fucking-blah blah."
why run from Vincenzo?
fewer journalists working
fewer artists working
fewer inane Slashdot conversations to read. Hm, on second thought, maybe we *should* all block ads :-D
"If you do not wish to be lied to, do not ask questions. If there were no questions, there would be no lies." -- b. traven
Why not just have the browser automatically DOS any popup window and the site which popped it up? Then putting up the ads starts costing much more bandwidth and they start getting false statistics.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
On the Mac, I have an app called "PithHelmet" which does ad blocking... I believe it keeps a database and uses a proxy server (though, I haven't really investigated, it works and it's easy ;-) I've used proximitron and other blockers, as well as host files which blocked sites before, but PithHelmet is more integrated and doesn't show broken links like less integrated stuff can.
Also, OmniWeb 5 has ad blocking (including banners) built in.
So the ad monkeys will get blocked before their site is even accessed. You can read an MSN ad on a single page!
I assume similar products are/will be available on Windows soon, too. This one's fairly easily to technically circumvent.
TiVo, with 30 second skip. No idea why people would not have a PVR of some sort, in this day and age.
You can enable 30-second skip on TiVo... 4 to 10 "blips" and you're done.
;-)
Hit select-play-select-3-0-select
Hear 3 dings. Done. Index button is now +30. Oh and the one a couple buttons left of it is like -7 seconds... helps for when the thumb gets overzealous
Oh, such nice chemistry tables too!
JavaScript: ON
Ad Blocking: ON
Pop-Ups: NONE
Advertising Images: NONE
Go Mozilla - you know the link.
Morals have little to do with it. Ethics are the issue. Somebody might feel morally obligated to tell you about the bible, but find it unethical to advertise subversively.
I've already seen these kind of advertisements used on websites. They are not like pop-up ads at all. Here is the difference:
A popup ad requires you to first, close the window to see the web page, or for that matter ANYTHING that may have been underneath it on your desktop. These can also appear in such rapid succession that you have no access to your computer for several seconds as you frustratingly try to close them all.
However, a transparent pop-up embedded in the webpage itself is not as much of a problem. It is contained within the browser window, so there is a clear seperation between the website, and anything else on your computer's desktop.
If you don't like website's that use advertising that's fine. Avoid them, or find some Mozilla tool to block them. For most people however, this is much less obtrusive than standard IE popups.
I use a modifed hosts in both Linux and in Windows 2000 and am happy with how it works. I use Linux most of the time. I have a slow dial-up connection and the web pages load faster whenever I can eliminate an advertisement. On some web pages I now get an empty rectangle where where the adverisement should have been. Sometimes an empty pop-up window comes up without the adverstisement in it. It does not eliminate advertisements from all websites. The modified hosts file probably only eliminates about a third or less of the advertisements but even that helps. I also had to empty the cache on my browser before I noticed most of the missing advertisement.
TyrranzzX mentioned something about a modified hosts affecting the time it takes a computer to boot up. My modified hosts file did not have any noticeable effect on how long it take either Linux or Windows to boot-up on my computer. I use a dial-up connection and also have my two computer home network.
From the standpoint of privacy I prefer to block any advertising related connection that I do not understand. I wonder what information about my online viewing habits are they sending back? Modifiying my hosts file was a quick easy solution that I am happy with. Perhaps there are better ways to do that but I have not yet tried them.
I would also like to know the extent to which this relates to spyware. I know a Windows using friend who removed 80 or more spyware related files from her computer and then discovered that her computer was fast once again. Does the modifed hosts file make it harder for spyware to install itself and do its mischief under Windows or not? When using Linux I probably do not have that problem or do I? Well anyway, I am happy with the results of my modified hosts file.
There's another great custom hosts file at someonewhocares.org/hosts. I use it everywhere, and it's wonderful.
-S
I saw a website that put up ads as background images... this "defeats" Mozilla's right click menu. Now it takes 30 seconds to view the source and bring up the ad in the foreground... painful.
Tsk tsk
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Dont you have those pesky popups that appear when you close a window? The old infinate loop popup problem. This code will bypass the Mozilla Pop Up blocker and launch popups on exit (Tested on Mozilla 1.7b):
l ", 'poppage11', 'toolbars=0, scrollbars=1, location=0, statusbars=0, menubars=0, resizable=1, width=800, height=800');
<SCRIPT language=Javascript>
<!-- BEGIN EXIT CODE
var shut2=true;
function exit2a() {
if (shut2)
props=window.open("http://site/popup.htm
}
-->
</SCRIPT>
</head>
<body onunload="exit2a()">
I happen to work in a bio lab and actually like it when the sales reps come by. I need their stuff and they're constantly filling me in on their new products. The new RNAi stuff that these companies are coming up with make my life a hundred times easier. The sales reps are knowledgeable about them and don't feed me bull about what they can do, but give me the facts.
There are also tons of moral ad guys who do pro bono work for good causes. I know a marketing guy who does pro bono work for a local wild-life rehabilitation center. That's a pretty sweet deal for the non-profit conservancy.
So stop being so fucking ignorant and realize that not all marketers are out to dupe and harass people.
"I think the U.N. is going to find that the blame lies with all the Sudanese rap music that glamorizes genocide."
He wasn't really on key but he had a gorgeous voice.
In Soviet Russia, pop-up ads block you!
Ok, ok, I'm sorry for that. Why can't advertisers find a way to give ads to people who want them and leave the rest of us the fuck alone. If I make a concious effort to BLOCK your pop-ups, BLOCK your spam, then why would I ever want to buy your product?
I do not try to block small banner ads like the one at the top of this page. I have no problem with those. It's pop-up/under ads, spam, and banner ads that make you scroll down to see jack shit that really piss me off. I mean, make your ads non-intrusive and I'm sure more people who actually need/want what you are offering will click that ad.
What are more annoying are pop-up ads advertising pop-up lockers that cost "only $500!". Wow, what a bargain, Firefox cam at this outrageous price of free. Meh, end rant.
No problems.
If you do not have Flash installed, you do not see any of these annoying floating or transparent ads.
m en ts/remove_player.htm
http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/ts/docu
alright, you first.
eudas
Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
Do you think the marketers will ever realize why there are 300 different types of popup-blocking software, but no AdWord-blocking software?
Caveat Emptor is not a business model.
I visited their web site. Ooops - Flash, that's blocked. So are all the CGI scripts, oops. Oh, you can't tell if I block or not?
I'm one who:
Runs Guard-IE with agressive settings on. If I want to see a Flash or other scripted site I'll turn the protector off. Otherwise kiss my lily white ass.
Puts the real nasties like the site mentioned into my hosts file as pointing to 127.0.0.1
Hates web ads with a passion.
So there you have it.
Adblock is a extension for Mozilla/Firefox that can block images, javascript, and even flash, among others. Works great.
After many years of using the web, I find that for a combination of RSS and Lynx.(a great text mode browser) work just great. Other times I use Mozilla but with javascript off, because any site that requires me to have it turned on had better be my credit card site,etc. I find that I just don't need javascript on at all see any web page I need. /dev/null? Right now all my cookies for lynx and mozilla goto /dev/null anyway...
But the questions I have: what is it that javascript adds of value to browsing? And how could a pop-blocker (like mozilla') be detected? A followup is, so why not add "features" to mozilla which will accept everything but simply send it
all to
I use Privoxy (version 3.03 on OS X) and the content of that site appears just fine - and without the annoying ads. Only one small ad near the bottom seemed to escape the Privoxy filters.
Example
Of Floating Graphic At Tiger Direct It's apparently a javascript function.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
I'm using Galeon 1.3.14 -- no problems using that page for me (clicked on one of the elements and it loaded). No popups (javascript enabled, popup blocking disabled).
I did catch a "If you have javascript disabled..." something or other for a flash of a second, but page content replaced it.
~Dalcius
Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
It's your computer. Don't let an unethical web programmer abuse you with your computer. If web programmers cannot use javascript responsibly on YOUR computer then take away the priveledge of running javascript on your computer. No javascript means no pop up ads.
If someone's website demands you enable javascript to view thier web page then go to their competitors web page instead. It is your computer. You paid for it. You own it. Do not let anyone abuse you with YOUR computer.
-Night Ranger
If you google search for it, you can find the the list of advertising urls to exclude without licensing the list from the flaming Commie Liberal that is linked to in the story.
The guy's posts make the Baldwin idiots, Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, Katy Couric, Bob Woodward and John Kerry look like a gathering of the RNC.
There's a better hosts file (well, more servers) at remember.mine.nu I use it and with Mozilla popup blocking, it's great! It's updated frequently and contains over 1800 servers. I practically never see ads anymore. And of course, like all Hosts based adblocking, it's platform independent and speeds up your connection.
1. install Smoothwall 2.0 (smothwall.org)
:)
2. install adzapper into smoothwall (sourceforge)
3. activate squid proxy in smoothwall
No more ads. ALL systems plugged into you lan are now protected. I don't care what they are, javascript, flash, gif, jpg, whatever.
The very few that do sneak through are easily tweaked out in adzapper settings.
On top of that Konqueror takes are of the strays that may sneak through pretty well.
It's damn rare that I see an ad for anything on my lan...
Doesn't seem fair to people who use browsers that don't support javascript.
It just doesn't want googleads (or any other ad company) using their content.
Interestingly, their code checks even for hacked operas that don't contain Opera by checking window.opera. Apparently that returns true even on a hacked Opera.
NOTE: I don't know what constitutes a 'hacked' opera, or why you'd want to.
GENERAL PUBLIC SIGNATURE (GPS) Any replies (derivatives) of this post must also use the GPS
Yeah. Every anonymous poster on slashdot is a moderate independent.
;0P
You learn something new every day.
Since you're signed on, it looks like we know your political persuasions, you luddite!
"Seriously, there is nowhere they won't put ads these days."
There's none printed on toilet paper.
My
Limekiller
It owns. It's a powerful proxy filter that can let you view webpages exactly how you want to. It's better than a prepackaged block all because you get to control exactly what it filters by writing the filters yourself. It's not limited to ads; there are filters to enhance browsing and others. Of course it isn't as easy to use as something like google toolbar.
http://www.popupcheck.com/ Check the unblockable pop up.
i went there and found a javascript that launched a flash ad that would not go away. So if i uninstalled flash would it not be there? Maybe I will just not go to those sites that use this crap. Fuggem.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
I actually click on Google adds regularly... Why? Because they are unobtrusive. I wish the advertisers would figure this out.
a customized HOSTS file
Sure. But the origin of this and the easiest way to do it is with this little gem:
ftp://radsoft.net/pub/bloatbusters/silencer.zip
radsoft.net
Falk eSolutions
isn't there an extra letter here ?
popups? I use lynx you insensitive clod
"As far as I am concerned they can place as many transparent images as they want. He probably meant translucent." No, he probably meant "transparent", which means see-through, not invisible, as you seem to imply. A clear light bulb is TRANSPARENT. A frosted one would be TRANSLUCENT. Word.
Likes marketing? Evil, definetly. Biology? Then it must be evil biology!
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
This explains a lot.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
I'm curious. Is this because of ad-blocking, or simply a result of broken MS-HTML?
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
When will we have a site to test our code against?
Maybe their site?
We almost need a contest measured in minutes to crack this new-fangled system.
Surely this counts as an attempt to circumvent security features. Class action anyone.
This perpetual motion machine Lisa made is a joke, it just keeps getting faster and faster. - Homer
...are RUINING the internet. Remember when this used to be such a fun place to be? You could find unlimited pages with unlimited information, chat with friends, share images, code, files, whatever. Do research for projects, POST research that you've done yourself, anything you liked, and all without corporate interference. Now you can't Google without getting a metric fuckton of bad results placed by advertisers.
I guess a big Thank You should go out to all the greedy bastards that decided to Cash In on this wonderful piece of technology.
I'm thinking of a handfull of them now....
Ridley Scott's Apple '1984' commercial....
Wendy's 'Where's the Beef?' campaign with (the late) Clara Peller....
That Coca Cola commercial with football player Joe Green and the kid....
The Cheer detergent commercial series with the silent, glasses wearing guy and the classical music background soundtrack....
All four were ads but somehow the 'sales pitch' got lost in the 'artistry' of the commercial.
I don't mind watching commercials like these because they are entertaining most of all.
Nowadays, that aspect is lost on most commercials aired today. It's all about marketing--setting up a favorable environment to persuasively showcase the product in: desparate and phony as a three dollar bill.
And don't get me started about 'ad creep' and 'product placement'.
Well now, if the marketers entertain first and market second, more people may watch their commercials instead of skipping over them with their VCRs and PVRs....
Commercials that are not entertaining (or at least informative) are percieved as a waste of time and treated as such. The industry's only other alternative would be to ban the existence of 'commercial skip' and 'fast forward' buttons on VCRs and PVRs manufactured in the future....
As far as I know popup's are opening new windows. This is very annoying, as you can have tons of new windows (and even windows poping up as you close the old ones) coming up to mess up you desktop.
Now pop-up blockers stop this!
If you enter a site that puts ads on top of their content (like floating <div>'s or similar) I don't really mind. When I close the window to that site - goodbye ad!
So the annoying part of popups are gone.... Hopefully.
-:) Oh no - not again.
www.rednebula.com
In any case, I'd REALLLLLY like to see them buy a Nokia 6600 or a Sony Ericsson P800 and try to browse their site.
More than mere navel gazing.
Use Lynx or OffByOne - problem solved.
Lynx is a text-only web browser.
Off By One is a script-free web browser.
Both browsers are immune to popups--hence no need for a popup blocker for the two leading browsers or 'New Online Ad Technology To Bypass Popup Blockers'.
THE ROOM - by Ray Russell (1961)
Crane awoke with the Tingle Tooth-foam song racing through his head. Tingle, he realized, must have bought last night's Sleepcoo time. He frowned at the Sleepcoo speaker in the wall next to his pillow. Then he stared at the ceiling: it was still blank. Must be pretty early, he told himself. As the Coffizz slogan slowly faded in on the ceiling, he averted his eyes and got out of bed. He avoided looking at the printed messages on the sheets, the pillowcases, the blankets, his robe, and the innersoles of his slippers. As his feet touched the floor, the TV set went on. It would go off, automatically, at ten P.M. Crane was perfectly free to switch channels, but he saw no point in that.
In the bathroom, he turned on the light and the TV's audio was immediately piped in to him. He switched the light off and performed his first morning ritual in the dark. But he needed light in order to shave, and as he turned it on again, the audio resumed. As he shaved, the mirror flickered instantaneously once every three seconds. It was not enough to disturb his shaving, but Crane found himself suddenly thinking of the rich warm goodness of the Coffizz competitor, Teatang. A few moments later, he was reading the ads for Now, the gentle instant laxative, and Stop, the bourbon-flavored paregoric, which were printed on alternating sheets of the bathroom tissue.
As he was dressing, the phone rang. He let it ring. He knew what he would hear if he picked it up: "Good morning! Have you had your Krakkeroonies yet? Packed with protein and--" Or, maybe,'Why wait for the draft? Enlist now in the service of your choice and cash in on the following enlistee benefits--" Or: "Feeling under the weather? Coronary disease kills four out of five! The early symptoms are--"
On the other hand, it could be an important personal call. He picked up the phone and said hello.
"Hello yourself," answered a husky, insinuating feminine voice. "Bob?"
"Yes."
"Bob Crane?"
"Yes, who's this?"
"My name's Judy. I know you, but you don't know me. Have you felt logy lately, out of sorts--" He put down the phone. That settled it. He pulled a crumpled slip of paper from his desk drawer. There was an address on it. Hitherto, he had been hesitant about following up this lead. But this morning he felt decisive. He left his apartment and hailed a cab.
The back of the cab's front seat immediately went on and he found himself watching the Juice-O-Vescent Breakfast Hour. He opened a newspaper the last passenger had left behind. His eyes managed to slide over the four-color Glitterink ads with their oblique homosexual, sadistic, masochistic, incestuous and autoerotic symbols, and he tried to concentrate on a news story about the initiating of another government housing program, but his attempts to ignore the Breeze Deodorant ads printed yellow-on-white between the lines were fruitless. The cab reached its destination. Crane paid the driver with a bill bearing a picture of Abraham Lincoln on one side and a picture of a naked woman bathing with Smoothie Soap on the other. He entered a rather run-down frame building, found the conect door, and pressed the doorbell. He could hear, inside the flat, the sound of an old-fashioned buzzer, not a chime playing the EetMeet or Jetfly or Krispy Kola jingles. Hope filled him.
A slattern answered the door, regarded him suspiciously and asked, "Yeah?"
"I--uh--Mrs. Ferman? I got your name from a friend, Bill Seavers? I understand you--" his voice dropped low, "--rent rooms."
"Get outta here; you wanna get me in trouble? I'm a private citizen, a respectable--"
"I'll, I'll pay. I have a good job. I--"
"How much?"
"Two hundred? That's twice what I'm paying at the housing project."
"Come on in." Inside, the woman locked, bolted and chained the door. "One room," she said. "Toilet and shower down the hall, you share it with two others. Get rid of your own garbage. Provide you
My parents purchased a Vista phone from Bell Canada which had a fairly large fancy-shmancy screen on it. The idea was that you can use the thing as a phone/address book and also do other "neat" things with it.
Much to their surprise, the damned phone now displays ads (a new one every 10-15 seconds or so), 24/7 on this annoying, brightly-lit green LCD screen.
If I were them I would have tossed it by now. Or sued Bell.
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
My reply to their webmaster:
I just thought I would give a bit of feedback on your banner blocking blocking (?) policy.
First, I think that if you cannot encourage subscriptions by members-only content or other benefits, perhaps you need to rethink the design of your site. There are many sites that I gladly pay a subscription to because the benefits offered to subscribed members is worth my time and the value is good.
Secondly, I believe that the issue here is trust. Websites have lost my trust as a user when it concerns advertising. Although you say your site does not use pop-over/pop-under ads or other more annoying forms thereof, there are sites that do. There are also sites where the advertising content is overdone or oppressive; hence, in addition to regular popup blockers I run a custom HOSTS file to block ad content. I am tired of being mentally violated by the Internet.
Thirdly, I find that ads are next to never effective when not properly directed. As an anonymous user to your site, you do not know about me or my preferences, my likes or dislikes, or my interests. Hence, your ads cannot be properly directed towards my interests. If websites would take more of an interest in directing their ad campaigns so that visitors would see things that they would possibly purchase, I believe the effectiveness would go up incredibly. Some sites do -- Amazon is a prime example of showing me things related to my interests. More sites could take that example.
Finally, I want you to know that I am not against online advertising. I think that it can be an effective way of generating revenue and, honestly, there are few ways of doing so if you are not selling actual products. However, your current ad processes will prevent me from visiting again as I cannot yet trust sites to deliver to me an experience that is worth my time when dealing with advertising.
Blog,Twitter
I give it a day after the introduction of these ads before there is an Ad Muncher (or Privoxy, for the linux folks, or Proxomitron for the weirdos) filter to block them. Anyone care to make a wager? Ad blocking adapts a hell of a lot faster than the ads themselves do.
Also, because of bug 157004 Use original URL in history and URL bar when an error page is generated
You need the Show Failed URL extension.
Phillip
who is the bitch modding me down?
go and register your mozilla profile u nerd
Seriously, why not. Since most company outthere already abuse DMCA. It's circumventing the pop-up block technology
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- If picture worth a thousand words, how many megapixels is it? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Now that's what I call a dead Proxomitron!
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
"The spams I've been getting lately are less and less legible."
Two words: offshore outsourcing
Quiznos ad exec at meeting: "We can't license Jar Jar Binks. However, I think I can still come up with something to REALLY drive the customers away!"
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Here are a few simple filters to enjoy the site using anything, including Opera. First one unhides the body (useful on the first page), second one unhides the content (on all other pages), third one explicitly blocks one of their ad blocks, fourth one removes the name "Opera" from the User-Agent string when Opera tries to spoof it as MSIE. To hide the ads themselves, please use your favourite ad-blocker.
[Patterns]
Name = "Retards at EnvChem.com"
Active = TRUE
URL = "*environmentalchemistry.com*"
Bounds = "<style*</style>"
Limit = 1024
Match = "\1visibility:hidden\2"
Replace = "\1visibility:visible\2"
[Patterns]
Name = "Retards at EnvChem.com 4"
Active = TRUE
URL = "*environmentalchemistry.com*"
Bounds = "<style*</style>"
Limit = 1024
Match = "\1{display:none}\2"
Replace = "\1{display:inline}\2"
[Patterns]
Name = "Retards at EnvChem.com 2"
Active = TRUE
URL = "*environmentalchemistry.com*"
Bounds = "<TD*</td>"
Limit = 10000
Match = "*class="RightBottom"*"
[HTTP headers]
In = FALSE
Out = TRUE
Key = "User-Agent: IEONLY (out) "
Match = "*MSIE*Opera*"
Replace = "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0)"
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
This is just an idea, and maybe it exists, I haen't really gone looking for it. But what about a web site that compiles a list of Pop-up adds, and the product they are advertising, possibly formulated from some of the Pop-up blockers. Then, along with that database, compile a list of the products competitors that do NOT employ pop-ups and spam advertising tactics. That way, before making an online purchase you can check and make sure that the company is "clean" in thier marketing practices?
(I would suggest building this into pop-up blocking software, to offer alterative sites, but I'm sure law suits would ensue)
Oh well, just some thought food.