Slashdot Mirror
Why Your Pop-Up Blocker Doesn't Work Anymore
An anonymous reader writes "If you've noticed that pop-up ad windows seem to have made an unwelcome return into your life, it's because they're not using the same easily blockable technology as before. The Adimpact system uses DHTML to annoy you, and there's no immediate prospect of a solution."
Almost completely devoid of content.
Won't be long before the anti-popup firefox plugins can detect css-based popup and allow you to disable them as well. Only problem is they can't be disabled across the board because it would break a lot of the "web2.0" functionality of websites.
DHTML popups are no big deal at all. They don't open a new window. They don't "pop under". They don't re-open when you try to close them...
The solution to them is simple and already implemented. Close the tab, and never return to that site again. Ever.
Problem solved.
"The Dynamic Popup Generator can create pressure pop-ups, unblockable DHTML pop-ups, PictoPop-ups, conditional popups, instant opt-in pop-ups, and rotating pop-ups"."
Wait, I have the answer...keep Javascript disabled for websites that do not really need it! Right now, I have Javascript enabled for...3 websites, all of which are trusted sites from either my job or my school. Popup free browsing, and incidentally, pages use less CPU time.
Seriously, why do we need Javascript to read articles or blogs? If your web apps are abusing Javascript to display ads, maybe it is time to consider not using web apps, or finding "friendlier" companies.
Palm trees and 8
I found it much less intrusive once every host in the adimpact.com domain started serving up 404 Not Found for all pages.
DNS is your friend, especially when your nameserver is declared a master for that domain and the zonefile contains a wildcard record pointing all names to the IP address of your own dedicated nothing-there Web server.
Been using always... one of the first things I do when I install a new Firefox is get Adblock Plus and NoScript (which is really annoying in and of itself, but that's another story).
So when I saw this thread I was like "I didn't notice anything lately."
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Nothing more annoying than getting a huge flash video animation splatted in front of the article you are reading,
There is a solution to this "problem". Don't install Flash. Flash is evil. Flash must die.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Just this week Yahoo mail started serving up ads that pop up an annoying window every time your mouse passes over it. I hope Yahoo loses a lot of market share over this. I know it was the impetus I needed to switch over to Google mail. Of course Yahoo doesn't offer mail forwarding so you lose your email address. Serves me right for ever using a provider that doesn't make it possible to migrate away.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
NoScript (which is really annoying in and of itself, but that's another story).
You got that right! I removed 'NoScript'. Every, and I mean every, stinking website I went to had most of their content dependent on scripts. So, I had to constantly click on allow for this time, or for this page, etc... And many times, even after enabling scripts for that page, they still wouldn't run. Very few websites didn't have that problem. Scripts are just too ubiquitous to block.
Flash is indeed evil, but it's also necessary to get anything out of an increasing number of sites. The choice is basically live with the occasional Flash abuse or cut yourself off from an ever-growing amount of content on the web. Whether that additional content is worth the annoyance of the occasional Flash ad is a personal decision.
"Bloody hell", I thought, is that what the web looks like?
Then I went back to Firefox with AdBlock/NoScript.
Do not want.
No sig today...
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm getting quite tired of the deluge of self-satisfied Adblock and NoScript "Me Too!" posts here whenever a story mentions online advertising. It's news for nerds. Everybody knows already.
this "solution" to the return of pop ups is of course akin to curing your hangnail by cutting off your foot
are you familiar with the phenomenon of the guy who doesn't own a television, and must remind every stranger he meets of this fact, constantly? if you look at the comments here, this article seems to have brought out the similarly quirky "look at me! i don't use javascript! i don't use flash!" brigade
ok, so you are proud of your bare html existence. good for you
but you might have noticed that the internet has evolved since 1994, and technologies, such as AJAX, are transforming the web browsing experience in GOOD ways, such as google maps. javascript is not merely cruft to make your anchor links animate. likewise, can you argue with the success and value of a site like youtube? which, by the way, works in flash?
javascript and flash are not in any way absolute negatives for the internet experience. they are merely useful tools whose usage is evolving, in good and bad ways. to disavow that obvious observation and just flat out block them does not make you wiser, it makes you an odd appendix of history. trumpeting your monklike ascetic internet existence doesn't add anything of value to the conversation, because, no, blocking javascript and flash is most definitely not the solution, really
when you announce that you don't use these technologies, all you show us is that you are indulging in some sort of odd attention-seeking disorder with a strange misplaced pride
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
This really is the best method. Its cross-platform and no matter what strategies the ad people try, I'm still blocking their server. Not to mention ad servers are a security risk. Most "Antivirus 2009" infections are from compromised ad servers delivering fake ads for the malware. These malware ads look a lot more legitimate when served up by forbes.com.
Just block them wholesale. Perhaps they will learn that we dont want overlays and popups. A simple ad that targets me really is a lot more effective than these tricks.
Wow, is that a free anonymous proxy?
http://www.adimpact.com/cgi-bin/webapp/nph-demo.cgi/000000A/http/google.com/
but it's also necessary to get anything out of an increasing number of sites.
If a site relies on Flash to convey its message, I don't go to it. I was looking for a car repair shop after the latest moron hit me and one site was nearly unreachable because the front page was entirely Flash-based. Had it not been for a site map link, I would not have been able to see anything.
Nor is this the first time this has happened. I have come across several sites, including restaurants, who have an entirely Flash-based site. I don't bother going to them either online or offline because of this nonsense.
The ONLY exception I can see for using Flash is if you have a product which you want people to see all sides of and you have a short display of the product rotating.
I have said it before and will continue to say it: There is no reason to have an entirely Flash-based site. None. If people want to come back to your site for a specific reason, they can no longer bookmark a page to do so. If someone has eyesight issues and uses a screen-reader, you've locked them out.
As I said in my journal, Flash is the new blink tag.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
DHTML overlays have been around for years - I know, I've been working in the industry for years *ducks* and they've been around longer than I have. Where is the story here? http://www.adopstools.net/index.asp?page=richmedia§ion=layer go on - make your own.
for(b=(a=0)+1;;b+=(a+=b))print(a+"\n"+b+"\n");
are you familiar with the idiotic windows vista practice of asking you to approve every executeable before it runs? after awhile, the average user just mindlessly clicks "approve" and doesn't even read the warning. and this is perfectly appropriate behavior: its the boy who cried wolf. an alert at every false positive leads people to completely ignore the alert
likewise, noscript is a wonderful extension... for the odd power user who likes such finetuned control over the minutiae of his browsing experience, and is keenly mindful and thoughtful about every site he visits and how he wants to profile his javascript footprint there
this describes perhaps 0.001% of web users
a real solution to the pop up problem is not to push the issue out to the end user and make them manage and fine tune their javascript footprint. in fact, as a solution, noscript represents a worse burden in terms of time and mental effort on the end user than simply closing pop ups when they open
and no, this doesn't mean the average end user is stupid simply because he doesn't want to exert the mental effort. a highly intelligent end user shouldn't have to work hard at his browsing experience, he just wants to browse with abandon, and that's a perfectly appropriate instinct. the end user, from the dumbest to the brightest, should not be expected to consider every click he makes on the web equivalent to the mental effort required to make a move in a game of chess
no, the real solution is to fine tune the browser's intelligence about how to handle pop ups. the advertising parasites are getting smarter, so the browser needs to get smarter. that's the real solution. an arms race between browser code and pop up code
but, no, i'm sorry: the end user must not be harassed even further, and that's what your noscript "solution" represents
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
no one should be expected to micromanage their browsing experience like this. i'm glad you do. but your behavior represents perhaps 0.001% of web browsers. you're mental effort is noble, but not ideal
no, really, your behavior is not ideal. because i should not have to consider every click i make on the web in the same way i would consider a chess move in a game of chess. i should, as a rule, click with abandon, and the browser should be intelligent enough to manage the cruft and parasites for me
you fix the problems we are talking about here, like pop ups, by improving the browser code. you don't shove the problem out to the end user such as with noscript, because, in a way, your exemplary but tedious micromanaging web browsing style is a WORSE burden than the occasional pop up and annoying flash ads
i repeat: your micromanaging web browsing style, to me, and i would confidently say according the majority of web users, is more of a burden than the javascript and flash cruft we encounter on the web
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
and news reports and... Flash is no more evil than guns or pencils. Flash doesn't create ads; people create ads.
Absolutely. Flashblock is a no-nonsense tool that is dead-simple to configure. I had everyone I know install it after a number of flash vulnerabilities started cropping up, and I've heard no complaints.
I consider Flashblock + Firefox my "compromise" with the advertisers: I will submit to viewing ads to help them pay for content, so long as they are not Flash, and so long as they are not pop-up/under. Really, I do not find static images and text annoying at all, and if an advertiser makes an animated GIF that is too annoying, I can just press ESC.
But if the advertisers insist on using this crap evervwhere and pushing an arms race, I won't hesitate to upgrade to noscript (and everyone I know) and shut the door entirely. I hope they won't force me to do that, because then they would get zero money from my page views.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
I don't think Flash is going away any time soon. As someone who knows several web developers, I can tell you they love Flash because they don't have to code the page differently for different browsers.
The fact that it obfuscates your source code and animates things (makes them "flashy," if you will) are added bonuses that give the management and marketing departments a huge boner.
But I like watching youtube vids...
I do too but I'd like them even more if they weren't Flash-based. Flash runs too slow on old computers.
The ONLY exception I can see for using Flash is if you have a product which you want people to see all sides of and you have a short display of the product rotating.
You've apparently never used the Domino's Pizza Tracker. The finest use of Flash since... well, pretty much ever.
Then I'll go somewhere else. Anyone who makes it that difficult for me to do business with them doesn't get my business.
if a refresh doesn't help, i click on my huge bigass Ctrl+W and never come back in such cases.
Websites done in flash are useless. I have never seen an exception. I can't bookmark anything. I can't link to a specific page. I can't copy any text. I can't search. Navigation buttons don't work.
All so some idiot can have spiffy transition effects between pages.
There are a number of sites I go to that have these damn click to pop ads, I'd still like to visit the site but without the ads. If I have to turn off NoScript anyway, it's gained me nothing.
Most sites don't host the script for their own ads, rather they use a third party script to do so. In most cases you can unblock a site, but still leave the ad providers site blocked. One of the replies to my original comment also reminded me of the fact that a while ago I modified my hosts file to black-hole all of the worst offenders with regards to ads/malware, and I run eDexter to serve up blank image files in their place.
/., but blocks all the ads.
Just as an example, right now I've got slashdot.org allowed, but doubleclick.net and google-analytics.com blocked, which allows me to use the comments and such on
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
Yes there is. Blacklist the sites that are infested with this type of advertising. Stop visiting them. Find alternatives.
My peace of mind does not depend on