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.
...but I got so distracted with those shiny X10 pop-up ads.
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.
Adblock plus, problem solved!
What popups?
This mostly popup free browsing experience brought to you by the makers of Firefox and NoScript.
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.
I use Firefox with the AdBlock Plus, NoScript, and FlashBlock add-ons installed. I haven't noticed any pop-up ads.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Unfortunately it would be an arms race of sorts, similar to virus definitions... requiring dom scripting to identify a particular class or id or attribute or some other unique element in the ad (possibly the image src which means it could piggy back on ad-blockers already in use)...
The idea is to use the DOM to walk back up from the unique Ad element to the containing div or divs, then turn them off or delete them.
Another way would be to identify the offending function in the script and set it to return false or something similar.
Someone could play around with greasemonkey or YUI anywhere and create a sample distribution...
I don't personally go to enough sites that do this to make the effort, so I'll leave it as an exercise for the class.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
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
... are like free endorsements for Firefox + adblock plus + NoScript + ... some other extensions.
The more they keep annoying users, the more popular the solution becomes.
Tie two birds together: although they have four wings, they cannot fly. (The blind man)
Use flash blocker.
Also Opera has a facility to easily block a feed. Right click, click on the offending item, click done. you're done.
How many sources does this company have? Unless they have a lot, their adds are gone.
I don't know if FF has this or not ...
It has subtracts too!
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
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...
Check out http://dhtmlpopups.webarticles.org/ for a quick set of examples of these.
It looks like a bit of experimentation could yeild a reasonably reliable greasemonkey script to kill these when not click initated.
Spyder
I've been using a hosts file since around 2003. It blocks out all those ads, popups, spyware,adware, stops alot of virii from calling home, you name it. I scan my computer about once a month, and I haven't had any of the 'serious outbreaks' of adware like all my friends. They all swear by their software programs to block it(ultimately, they always end up reformatting when they cant quite get rid of them all) but my solution uses no resources and doesn't require 'scanning' for them regularly.
I use it on my parent's computer and only update it once a year at Christmas. Even with only updating once a year they haven't gotten any adware/spyware yet, and it's been 3 years.
I highly recommend it. Give it a try, there's nothing to lose but the crapware.
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
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
Or install Firefox and the Flashblock extension, which blocks ALL Flash content until explicitly allowed (which can either be once or always for a particular site). Which is better than AdBlock's version, that lets you block Flash but makes you explicitly block rather than blanket-block. (Blanket-block is better because 90% or more of Flash content encountered is ads.)
Loose things are easy to lose. You're getting your hair cut. They're going there to see their aunt.
Or install Firefox and the Flashblock extension
No kidding... I was thinking "what popups?" when I read this. I run noscript, but same difference.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
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");
Yeah! Let's take the Internet back to it's Golden Age, back in 1993. When men were men, browsers were Mosaic, and HTML was v1.0!
The problem with not installing flash is that there are a ton of great games out there using flash, and a bunch of nice content sites like Youtube that use flash. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not the solution.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
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
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.
And a combo of hosts-file, Adblock and Flashblock is almost unbeatable. I often get comments from people who use my computers that the browser seems a lot less cluttered with ads than theirs. This is because I take steps not to see ANY advertisements unless I ask for them.
The trouble with Flash is that it is usually a triumph of form over content. It encourages a policy of delivering content in bites easily digested by a sparrow, which I find less than admirable. It is more cumbersome to maintain, so it usually isn't maintained at all. Lots of glitzy display does not help communicate information. The best way to do this is to use basic HTML, which people can bookmark or copy/paste as required, on any machine, without swallowing up megabytes of bandwidth.
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.
Why not just telnet to port 80 and read the page as it streams across?
Right.
I had to go to the website's ISP, get the webpage on paper tape, take it back to the computer room, type in the binary codes using only the 1's and 0's on a teletype machine and then read the content from the blinking lights on the front of a PDP-8/E. And when we were finished, the sysadmin would kill us and dance on our graves singing Hallelujah.
Why doesn't Slashdot ever get slashdotted?
I can attest personally to the power and convenience of Flashblock. It's simply a great system.
Upon installation (and a restart), Flashblock will replace all, ALL, flash components on every page with an empty, but clearly outlined box where the flash applet would have been. In this way, over all page layout is unaffected during the block.
At the center of this empty block, Flashblock puts a recognizable stylized "F" icon, which when hovered over, turns into a standard "Play" symbol. Personally, I think it should always be a play symbol, but that's just nit picking. After this icon is clicked, the flash applet, and only THAT applet, loads and begins just as it would have insisted on doing when, or even before the page was finished loading.
No more crazy ads. No more loud and obnoxious audio content. No more flash-bomb pages, slowing the system to a crawl, and/or crashing firefox. Admittedly, the crash problem still exists, but now you risk it only at your own behest. Normal use of flash, e.g. Youtube, is almost completely unaffected, and IMHO even improved by flashblock. The web page is cleanly and gracefully separated from the flash content, as it always should have been.
Flashblock is the first extension I download on any new firefox install. I highly recommend it.
May the Maths Be with you!
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.
they love Flash because they don't have to code the page differently for different browsers.
So instead they use Flash, which is -guaranteed- not to work in all browsers, especially mobile ones?
Sounds like someone is in need of a few extra visitors.
Perhaps in the form of a distributed set of requests - that really shouldn't be denied - for service, but we surely shouldn't attack them.
Question everything
Instead Bitch to the web master for failing to comply with either the U.S. ADA (americans with disabilities act)or the EU disabilities act if they're a commercial website. Works wonders and if they basically tell you to "Sod Off Sucker" then simply forward their reply to the appropriate authorities and prepare to inudate them with a federal/eu investigation.
Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
Netflix Ajax Remover
This script removes the ajax handlers from all of the netflix add to queue links.
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/4055
We have the best government that money can buy.
Why give impressions? Nobody is paid off impressions for one, and also it would confuse the accuracy of advertising.
Also plenty of people, like myself, do not want to see ads period. We are well past the generational concept from previous generations of "you can buy our eyeballs". Answer is, you can't. I don't care if it's an ad I would actually want to see. I want to browse the web to find what I want.
Only type of "ad" I accept is browsing somethingawful's forums unregistered where they explicitly say Adbot. Also accepted are "click here to view our ads" ideas. However "PLEASE LOOK AT OUR SIGN IN CAPS" as a banner, does not deserve my eyes at all.
The deceptiveness of advertising on the web does not make it more effective. It's the head fake, that gives people a reason to view things. 100% of ads could be taken off the web and many sites would do just fine. Even google and doubleclick have other ways to garner profits. This is something many websites haven't wrapped their heads around. People may be tolerant, but it's really a waste of cash/time.
Google could truly help people make their own sites more relevant in comparison to what meta tags show up,etc aka: website consulting. I bet they already do this anyway. Ads as a market is something many of people are just waiting for it to become obsolete.
Use adblock plus element hiding helper to get rid of the floating div(you might also need to crush the background overlay div).
Then you dont need to click close ever again.
http://adblockplus.org/en/elemhidehelper
We have the best government that money can buy.
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.
I'm already off your lawn.
Lawns?...Luxury... in my day we didn't have lawns. A dead peice of grass sitting in a cracked pot was all you could expect.
Sad but true, the number of flash only sites are increasing. I planned a trip to SE Asia lately and was shocked to see how many hotels had flash only sites and most of them weren't using the latest version of flash. Some were so old that they still had the Macromeida logo when loading and they took their sweet time in doing so.
I don't think its increasing due to many sites being remade into flash but due to the fact that new sites are made with flash due to the fact designers don't have a clue. Most people don't actually see their sites live from a remote location. My company has a marketing/corporate communications arm so I can say that most clients see their websites in carefully planned demonstrations not real world conditions and many remain blissful unaware of how poorly some sites perform. Realistically a demonstration should be made whilst VPN'ed into a remote box on a cheap domestic broadband connection, not the business grade fibre that we pay thousands per month for but using reality to demonstrate a point is the antithesis of marketing.
Add to this the fact that most designers cant even write basic HTML. They would be lost without their WYSIWYG editors and Flash Dev tools that do the work for them. I've put designers and "web developers" in front of their own HTML code only to be faced with the most vapid and blank expressions as they clearly don't have a clue what they've written. Most designers don't understand the technology they are using, this is why we end up with all flash, bandwidth hogging sites.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Slashdot has ads?