Google, Amazon, Microsoft Reportedly Paid AdBlock Plus To Unblock

RoccamOccam writes with the following news from The Register: Internet giants Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Taboola have reportedly paid AdBlock Plus to allow their ads to pass through its filter software. The confidential deals were confirmed by the Financial Times, the paper reported today [Paywalled]. From the Register's article: Eyeo GmbH, the German startup behind Adblock Plus, said it did not wish to comment. So far more than 300 million users have downloaded its software, it said. The add-on is free to download, with Eyeo generating revenue through its "whitelisting" programme. Companies can request their ads to be unblocked as long as they comply with AdBlock's "acceptable ads" policy. Large companies pay a fee for the service.

Comments

Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

'nough said.

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

+1 moved to it pretty much once plus started that auto-allow some crap.

Re:Adblock Edge

[Vyse of Arcadia]

Mod parent up, even though he/she/it is an AC. Adblock Edge is a fork of AdBlock Plus that removes all the acceptable ads nonsense.

Re:Adblock Edge

[TuringTest]

ÂBlock (read as "micro-block") has smaller memory footprint than AdBlock (and therefore Adblock Edge), and can use the same major privacy lists (EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter Lowe's Ad Server).

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

uBlock

Nice and lightweight.

Re:Adblock Edge

[HyperQuantum]

Or Privacy Badger, which has ad blocking only as a side-effect, not as its primary purpose.

Re:Adblock Edge

[CauseBy]

Thank you. I will switch in Firefox immediately. What should I use for Crome (which doesn't have Adblock Edge)?

Re:Adblock Edge

[fluor2]

thanks! immediately replaced adblock plus

Re:Adblock Edge

[geminidomino]

Privacy Badger comes from the EFF, which is just as bad about "acceptable intrusiveness" if the advertiser is well-behaved, where well-behaved, for some reason, doesn't preclude tracking bugs.

Re:Adblock Edge

[geminidomino]

I'll give that one a try. Thanks for that

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

Install a new extension instead of just unchecking the "allow acceptable ads" box? Why?

Re:Adblock Edge

[x_t0ken_407]

Yeahhh, I've been using this for a few months now, just as good as ABP as far as blocking ads. Can't speak much to the performance differences as they've been negligible on my "beefy" hardware, but the lack of special whitelists for ad makers is a huge plus.

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

ÂBlock (read as "micro-block")

I suggest that as long as Slashdot refuses to acknowledge that there are characters outside of ASCII-7, we use character entities:

μBlock (read as "micro-block")

or latex:

\mu Block (read as "micro-block")

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

uBlock instead in both Firefox and Chrome.

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks to the author of Micro Block for calling it "Block" instead of "Micro Block" so that I can't actually search for it and install it.

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realise Adblock Plus has a tick box to enable/disable acceptable/sponsored ads in the filter preferences, right?
This then makes the behaviour the same as Adblock Edge...

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never seen an "acceptable" add pass through. But maybe that's because I use noscript along with adblock+?

Re:Adblock Edge

[rtb61]

There is also NoScript and if everyone remembers there was quite the squabble between NoScript and Adblock. NoScript provides a measure of choice in ads, if they play nice, you let the ads through, if they suck you kill the script that calls up the ad. So no cookies and no scripts for the naughty and invasive. So advertise crap, gambling, psuedo conservatism et al and you are gone.

Of course I think those who display ads should be held responsible for the contents of those ads and prosecuted when those ads are proven false.

Re:Adblock Edge

[david_thornley]

FWIW, NoScript can be a pain, because lots of websites rely on scripts. I use it, but I sometimes have to look at a long list of domains and try to guess which one provides the functionality I want and which is just trying to get information out of me (or worse). I don't use Adblock (ads really don't bother me as long as they don't try to run arbitrary code on my computer), but I'd suspect that would be much less hassle.

Re:Adblock Edge

[rtb61]

So the problem with NoScript is you get greater control but youch starting it afresh on a new computer requires configuring across many web sites as you target all the renamed advertising sites, they don't just have one name, they have many now. So play with stumbleupon for a day and you will pick most of them up and it's mainly for if you want to let some advertisers through if they and the hosting web site are well behaved. Of course each time you hit a new web site you have to decide what you will allow through if anything and some can have a huge number of scripts, generally they are poorly behaved sites, whilst others will only run a minimum. Some even appear completely blank until you allow them through.

Re:Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

You can thank /.'s horrible Unicode support for that

Re:Adblock Edge

[abassim]

One good utility is "Ad Muncher", now even it's pro version is free. The site is: https://www.admuncher.com/ The owner is a respectful man, he gave me, years ago, a licence key for the pro version free of charge when told him I live in a place where bank transactions are difficult.

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Companies can request their ads to be unblocked as long as they comply with AdBlock's "acceptable ads" policy. Large companies pay a fee for the service."

How is this news? Seriously, how?

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Dins]

In the past the end user can still opt to not see any ads, even if they comply with the "acceptable ads" policy. This would be news if they are making a change so that the end user is forced to see a given ad that the advertiser pays extra for, regardless of their extension settings.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[BarbaraHudson]

Because most people just click ok on anything they see without reading anything. Ditto with this clickbait news.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[fustakrakich]

Did any ads pop up?

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[the_other_chewey]

In the past the end user can still opt to not see any ads, even if they comply with the "acceptable ads" policy. This would be news if they are making a change so that the end user is forced to see a given ad that the advertiser pays extra for, regardless of their extension settings.

They are not.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[noshellswill]

Running FFox on  Ubuntu_14.04/MATE:

I run ADBLOCK+ and have  always **allowed  by check-box** selected ads to be displayed. Fair's fair. But. I have yet to see the first ad! Anywhere !! None nada noone nix nyete zero --- where are these "selected" ads? Are they(?) clever enough to know I've been surfing parts for  a new XEON_1270.v3 workstation build ??  I'd like to see a couple relevant ads cause the  tek (can we say BIOS etcetc) details are potential show-stoppers. It appears vis' advertizing that ADBLOCK+ still keeps my screens more-chaste than Caesars wife.

Re: Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't know that. I assumed a product called adblock's sole purpose was to block ads. I'd better start reading the fine print on my detergent, insecticide, anti-virus software etc too... Seriously, the guys behind adblock don't deserve a second chance. Name them and shame them.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[quantaman]

"Companies can request their ads to be unblocked as long as they comply with AdBlock's "acceptable ads" policy. Large companies pay a fee for the service."

How is this news? Seriously, how?

A product that purports to block ads accepts money to show you ads.

I'm sure some people have heard of it before but it's most definitely newsworthy.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[blackraven14250]

It's extraordinarily well known that they accept unobtrusive ads - go to their web page, and it's literally bullet point #2 under their heading, sandwiched between "Blocks banners, pop-ups and video ads - even on Facebook and YouTube" and "It's free", with a link to a page describing *why* they do it and instructions on how to turn it off if you so choose. Many of the people who use Adblock Plus, myself included, use it specifically to block intrusive or broken ads, rather than all ads. As an example, on Twitch, there's ads that play in certain spots of the stream determined by the streamer - that could be fine, except for the fact that Twitch ads are broken. They don't adhere to volume settings, and frequently crash the player - a giant pain when you just happen to have a stream on while doing something else, especially since they always run a "preroll" ad when you load or reload a stream, which itself can crash the player. That's outright unacceptable. Google ads, OTOH, are about as unobtrusive as they get, and don't outright break the sites they're on, so I don't have a problem with that.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[CastrTroy]

They accept money for their time taken to go through the process of checking that you're actually compliant with their "acceptable ads policy". They don't actually just allow you to pay money to be put on a list of unblocked stuff. Your ads still have to meet the criteria of "acceptable". Personally, I'm not really that much against it. I don't mind some ads, as long as they are not animated/noisy/misleading/inappropriate/fills-the-entire-screen. Web sites need money to survive, and ads are a decent way for obtaining money. Ad Block probably has to do a fair amount of work to run, and to ensure that advertisers stay compliant. I would rather they charge the advertisers than me for the money they need to operate. If they get enough people using their product, then they basically hold the keys, and can make advertisers behave, and make some money in the process.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[kylemonger]

Ambrose Bierce's short story "The Ingenious Patriot" comes to mind.

Having obtained an audience of the King an Ingenious Patriot pulled a paper from his pocket, saying:

          "May it please your Majesty, I have here a formula for constructing armour-plating which no gun can pierce. If these plates are adopted in the Royal Navy our warships will be invulnerable, and therefore invincible. Here, also, are reports of your Majesty's Ministers, attesting the value of the invention. I will part with my right in it for a million tumtums."

          After examining the papers, the King put them away and promised him an order on the Lord High Treasurer of the Extortion Department for a million tumtums.

          "And here," said the Ingenious Patriot, pulling another paper from another pocket, "are the working plans of a gun that I have invented, which will pierce that armour. Your Majesty's Royal Brother, the Emperor of Bang, is anxious to purchase it, but loyalty to your Majesty's throne and person constrains me to offer it first to your Majesty. The price is one million tumtums."

          Having received the promise of another check, he thrust his hand into still another pocket, remarking:

          "The price of the irresistible gun would have been much greater, your Majesty, but for the fact that its missiles can be so effectively averted by my peculiar method of treating the armour plates with a new -"

          The King signed to the Great Head Factotum to approach.

          "Search this man," he said, "and report how many pockets he has."

          "Forty-three, Sire," said the Great Head Factotum, completing the scrutiny.

          "May it please your Majesty," cried the Ingenious Patriot, in terror, "one of them contains tobacco."

          "Hold him up by the ankles and shake him," said the King; "then give him a check for forty-two million tumtums and put him to death. Let a decree issue declaring ingenuity a capital offence."

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not. Still didn't stop the shitstorm about this exact same thing, last year.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[quantaman]

It's extraordinarily well known that they accept unobtrusive ads - go to their web page, and it's literally bullet point #2 under their heading

That's not the issue. The problem is they're only accepting unobtrusive ads (at least from big companies) when they get paid.

That's a very different ethical practice than just white-listing unobtrusive ads.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[quantaman]

They accept money for their time taken to go through the process of checking that you're actually compliant with their "acceptable ads policy". They don't actually just allow you to pay money to be put on a list of unblocked stuff. Your ads still have to meet the criteria of "acceptable". Personally, I'm not really that much against it. I don't mind some ads, as long as they are not animated/noisy/misleading/inappropriate/fills-the-entire-screen. Web sites need money to survive, and ads are a decent way for obtaining money. Ad Block probably has to do a fair amount of work to run, and to ensure that advertisers stay compliant. I would rather they charge the advertisers than me for the money they need to operate. If they get enough people using their product, then they basically hold the keys, and can make advertisers behave, and make some money in the process.

If this practice is so fair and just then why don't they mention it? If they're trying to make some money then why do they ask for donations while saying "nobody profits directly from it[ad blocking]".

According to both you and their site misleading ads are unacceptable. How is this undisclosed source of revenue from major advertisers not misleading?

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[quantaman]

They accept money for their time taken to go through the process of checking that you're actually compliant with their "acceptable ads policy". They don't actually just allow you to pay money to be put on a list of unblocked stuff. Your ads still have to meet the criteria of "acceptable". Personally, I'm not really that much against it. I don't mind some ads, as long as they are not animated/noisy/misleading/inappropriate/fills-the-entire-screen. Web sites need money to survive, and ads are a decent way for obtaining money. Ad Block probably has to do a fair amount of work to run, and to ensure that advertisers stay compliant. I would rather they charge the advertisers than me for the money they need to operate. If they get enough people using their product, then they basically hold the keys, and can make advertisers behave, and make some money in the process.

They don't seem to agree with your justification, according to them "Adblock Plus is only as good as its filters. The elements Adblock Plus blocks by default are defined in filter lists which are maintained by voluntary contributors. By constantly updating them, this community ensures that Adblock Plus blocks all annoying ads on every website."

So they describe their filter list as a product of voluntary labour. If they're really spending the money on evaluating Google's ads then why don't they mention that? And if it is just volunteer labour then where does the money go?

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not the issue. The problem is they're only accepting unobtrusive ads (at least from big companies) when they get paid.

That's a very different ethical practice than just white-listing unobtrusive ads.

Like you said, only big companies have to pay.
It would be less ethical if individuals had to pay, but as we all know, corporations are not people...

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[flappinbooger]

So... this isn't news?

I can click a 'switch' and turn off 'acceptable ads' and it's been that way for a long time now.

So maybe it IS news because I didn't know/realize/take the time to think about the fact that they make money off this.

Good for them. They deserve to eat too. Adblock Plus is reliable and makes the internet tolerable and safer. Letting through some 'GRAS' ads for cash is fine with me. As long as there is a switch where I can turn them off too...

(Generally Regarded as Safe)

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's just how it works. They have no obligation to white list their favorite unobtrusive ads. ABP has lion's share of the ad-blocking market for doing good work, and now they're making bucks. If it goes too evil, ABP will be abandoned with haste.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[blackraven14250]

Not really. ABP needs to certify the company's advertising practices to at least a moderate degree. They need to do extra work to allow only ads that are unobtrusive. They make no attempt to hide that they get paid by large companies, and give every user the opportunity to opt out. That's not terrible ethics, that's transparency in action.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[flappinbooger]

Well, I guess my comment is worth 5 karmas.

Let's reply to my own comment and talk about the ethics of blocking all adds all the time.

There are websites / blogs I go to that rely on ads to keep going. The operator spends massive amounts of his time and money running the website. I didn't even KNOW he had ads on it until one day he commented that he changed his ad stream. I felt bad.

But I didn't enable ads on his site.

What percentage of people even KNOW you can block ads?

What percentage of people who DO block ads flip the switch and kill the "unobtrusive" ads?

How long will the ad supported model on the internet continue to work?

Are we killing the internet by blocking ads?

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

GRAS? No fucking way. If it's got active content, it's not safe in the least.
 
If those companies could be trusted to only allow static content over their advertising network, it would be fine. However, even the text ads have scripts and cookies attached to them. Seeing as the vast majority of drive-by malware is served by compromised ad networks (Why compromise one site when you can compromise a server connected to hundreds?!), ads are not welcome on my system.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

Letting through some 'GRAS' ads

Ssshhhh...ssssshhhhhh...ssshhhhhh...Keep quiet about the 'GRAS' ads, man. Other than Colorado, 'GRAS' is still illegal in most of the US.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

In the past the end user can still opt to not see any ads, even if they comply with the "acceptable ads" policy. This would be news if they are making a change so that the end user is forced to see a given ad that the advertiser pays extra for, regardless of their extension settings.

In the current the the user can opt out of seeing all ads in Adblock Plus, it's a fucking checkbox in the subscription lists menu.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you value your data?
I do, and because of that, no ads are acceptable, even though I use linux.

Re:Company does exactly what it says it does...

[visavillem]

Let's reply to my own comment and talk about the ethics of blocking all adds all the time.

I'm not blocking ads, because i'm an a***ole, but mainly because of the security concerns. Until the ad networks start to seriously screen stuff that goes out there, i'm going to block any ads i can. Also, a lot of the ads are intrusive, use flash, javascript and whatnot. So the browsing experience is also a concern for me. I really hate it when i have to close a million browser windows, that have popped up trying to sell me stuff i really don't need, or the ads that cover most (or all in some cases) of the text i'm interested in, and i have to go and search the close button instead of starting to consume the content. I don't really mind the small text-based ads that appear here and there, so i don't block those. All the others are going to be blocked, even if i have to write a custom filter for them. So the message to the content providers and also the ad networks: if you want us not to block your ads, make them look and play nice. And relevant.

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice to see you're still pushing that.

The ad companies have already realized that they can set up *.adserver.com and dish out ads from an infinite number of hostnames. Some of them have even started setting up CDN networks using IP Anycast: pull a tiny file from the closest server by IP with the IP of the ad server to pull the final ad from, no hostnames at all. After all, it's not like a human is ever going to intentionally visit your adserver so why bother with a human readable hostname?

Hosts had its heyday, and there are still a lot of hidebound ad companies too big'n'slow'n'stupid to change that you can block so there's certainly merit in continuing it for now, but it's going the way of the buggy whip.

Maybe you should get a job writing a new hosts file driver for Microsoft that can handle wildcards and IP blocks.

Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

WE all know you only peddle viruses and spyware....

Please go away, nobody likes you and you are simply a script kiddie.

Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Look through these comments. There can be only one conclusion: if you use APK's Hosts File Engine, you are supporting a spammer.

Re: Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Billly Gates]

Yeah but is Malware bytes WEBSCALE??

Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[BarbaraHudson]

APK always sees red
When people point out the '90s are dead
To him, spamming his HOSTS file
Is really not at all that vile,
Use it or you're dead!

Eventually it'll even be
A replacement for systemd
But don't you fret
'Cuz you can bet
It'll replace Windows registry

So sad, too bad, that those who boast
How good it is, they anonymous post
Because those "others" are just he
Hiding behind anonymity
Otherwise "they" would be toast.

And he attacks anyone
Who criticizes spamming he as done
He posts crap-floods filled with hate
Trying to intimidate
So now critics post anon.

Alexander P Kowalski
Do your worst, you will see
You're still a fool,
A royal tool,
You're hurting yourself, not me,

Burma Shave

Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[jafiwam]

Nice to see you're still pushing that.

The ad companies have already realized that they can set up *.adserver.com and dish out ads from an infinite number of hostnames. Some of them have even started setting up CDN networks using IP Anycast: pull a tiny file from the closest server by IP with the IP of the ad server to pull the final ad from, no hostnames at all. After all, it's not like a human is ever going to intentionally visit your adserver so why bother with a human readable hostname?

Hosts had its heyday, and there are still a lot of hidebound ad companies too big'n'slow'n'stupid to change that you can block so there's certainly merit in continuing it for now, but it's going the way of the buggy whip.

Maybe you should get a job writing a new hosts file driver for Microsoft that can handle wildcards and IP blocks.

Maybe a few of them. Maybe on the particular porn or torrent sites you frequent.

A relatively stale HOSTS file I use is still QUITE effective at blocking ads.

The next step, will be to set some static DNS settings up in HOST and then install and use a DNS server on which, I run authoritative zones for places I don't want to see. While more of a pain, it'll be more effective.

And when they register domains, it'll be blocks of IP addresses. They'll spend more money trying to get ads to my network than just taking the revenue hit of the three users ON my network will ever cost them.

Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[electrosoccertux]

I was reading a poem
one line
per sign
(like downloading
with a modem!)
but after 5
I noticed 'twas broken
he wrote a sonnet--
not a token:
far too long
to be spoken.
it ended in Burma Shave
a bad omen!
(for shaving the scrotum)
with 'ads in the middle
amazon paid
to block the riddle

Google Amazon Microsoft

No facebook?

[Anonymous Coward]

More seriously though, this looks very bad on AdBlock. I'm a user on firefox, and am quite unhappy at this.

Re:No facebook?

[pmontra]

I'm also a Firefox user, with AdBlock. I disabled the acceptable ads checkbox so I don't see any ad (I would have noticed). If AdBlock makes any money out of the ads companies, good for them. If they force acceptable ads to everybody, I'll move to something else. uBlock seems to be as good. There will always be something to block all ads. At worst the hosts file.

Re:No facebook?

[epyT-R]

No it doesn't. They've openly admitted their position from the beginning. There's a checkbox that enables the whitelist. If you don't like it, turn it off. If you want to block social media tracking just add the 'fanboy' social media blocklist subscription.

Re:No facebook?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed.

If this means business as normal - acceptable ads disableable? Okay. Acceptable ads, if you are into them, are still better than the wild west of pop-ups, pop-unders, roll-overs, video, audio, etc.

If this means Acceptable ads now no longer stops all ads? Time to rise up and move on.

HTTP Switchboard user here (Chrome Only AFAIK, but I don't really use the other guys except for when required)

Re:No facebook?

[JohnFen]

True, ABP is not being even remotely deceptive. I don't like the practice, but they aren't doing anything wrong here. For the record, I react to not liking it in an even more effective way than using their checkbox: I avoid using ABP.

Re:No facebook?

[epyT-R]

Of course. Now if there are hidden whitelists, that's another story.

Things

[Anonymous Coward]

Some people get AdBlock to avoid intrusive adverts. I don't see this being a problem for them.

However some, such as myself, use AdBlock as part of an anti-tracking solution. This concerns me more.

Re:Things

[bigalzzz]

The tracker blocking was what made me switch adblocking on. I like the idea that they would only let through ads that don't track me, I want to support companies that rely on advertising, but not at the loss of my privacy. That said I understand why companies resent having to pay someone to allow them to make money by verifying their ads are 'acceptable'.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

I buy a service from AdBlock (ads removal) and those companies are paying for it. Sounds good to me :-)

Re:Things

[Crashmarik]

That said I understand why companies resent having to pay someone to allow them to make money by verifying their ads are 'acceptable'.

Their users resent them allowing third party Flash/Javascript adds that are frequently attack vectors.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

That said I understand why companies resent having to pay someone to allow them to make money by verifying their ads are 'acceptable'.

Tough shit: if those companies hadn't tried to ruin the internet in years past with popups, popunders, flashing banner ads, and all kinds of other obscenity, users would never have bothered resorting to adblockers.

Re:Things

[dave562]

There are better solutions for that, like Ghostery.

Re:Things

[bigalzzz]

True, I certainly fall into that category. But at the same time as a creator of a site when it comes to installing advert systems there's never a choice only serving your viewers non invasive ads. It's unfortunate because site owners suffer because of this. Hopefully this will reach a head some time in the near future and the ad companies/govt will realise that people need to have a choice over whether companies are allowed to track them across the web. Although given the governments love of tracking people online I can't see them doing much...

Re:Things

[BigT]

I find NoScript combined with ABP works well for me. It ensures that what does get through probably won't be too annoying.

Re:Things

[Spamalope]

Tough shit: if those companies hadn't tried to ruin the internet in years past with popups, popunders, flashing banner ads, ...

You forgot serving malware dropping ads they claim they're not responsible for, while shaming users as thieves for blocking those infection vectors. Flashblock + Adblock edge dropped our employee's infection rate to 1/3. When I can recover damages from website who infect my systems, I'll review the decision to ad block.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

That said I understand why companies resent having to pay someone to allow them to make money by verifying their ads are 'acceptable'.

Their users resent them allowing third party Flash/Javascript adds that are frequently attack vectors.

Ads or ad-blocking engines have little to do with disabling the functions of Flash and/or Java altogether. That's your call to shut them off in the browser, not theirs. If you're that concerned, do it, and don't blame others.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I got a virus/malware from a banner ad on a sketchy site. Anivirus program didn't detect the malware until the antivirus definitions were updated a few days later. I forgot the name of the trojan/malware/virus but it deposited some files in \program files and \windows\system folders.

Re:Things

[bondsbw]

I would be perfectly fine with an ad blocker that only blocked those kind of ads.

Actually I would add this: a timeout on any legitimate ads that are loaded before the page finishes displaying, and a bandwidth cap on all ads.

Do these things, and we might have an advertising system that most people have little problem with while being valuable enough to promote a healthy internet market.

Re:Things

[edtice1559]

The companies that are now wiling to follow "acceptable ad" policies are not necessarily the "those companies" to which you refer. You can't really lump all companies with an ad-supported model into the same boat. It does seem reasonable to give the user a choice. No adds, "acceptable ads," or all ads (in which case you don't even need AdBlock)

Re:Things

[CauseBy]

Exactly. So how long do advertisers have to play fair before they can be forgiven? I'd say, one hundred years. See ya in 2098. If the advertisers are gentle and respectful from now until then, then my grandchildren can consider unblocking ads.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

I don't care if they're not exactly the same companies. The ones which did pop-ups ruined it for everyone, and anyone who didn't participate in that needs to realize that and accept it. It's the same way with any group: you're responsible to an extent for other members of your group, like it or not, and you will suffer repercussions from the bad behavior of other members of your group because outsiders *will* lump you together.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

Yeah, at least that long.

It's like hitchhiking. That used to be perfectly safe, but then some drivers ruined it for everyone. Who hitchhikes these days? No one unless they're really desperate and down-and-out.

After a group (or activity) gains a reputation, it's really hard to undo it. And these reputations are usually gained for good reason.

Re:Things

[geminidomino]

Not sure if you're being snarky or are just unaware, but Ghostery is even scummier in their partnering with ad companies.

Disconnect does much the same thing on Firefox.

Re:Things

[Kjella]

Tough shit: if those companies hadn't tried to ruin the internet in years past with popups, popunders, flashing banner ads, and all kinds of other obscenity, users would never have bothered resorting to adblockers.

Oh please when did you last see a ripped TV show with the ads even though there's no malware, no tracking, no pop-up/unders just an entirely harmless video stream? A lot of people want to block ads just because they're ads and not content, they don't have to be obnoxious or dangerous ads. Then people go nuts when they instead use product placement and such were you can't slice and dice the content to only take the interesting bits and not the ones that pay the bills.

And "those companies" who were scum are in general still scum and finding new ways to circumvent blockers, often by embedding them in such ways that you won't get the real content until after you've seen or clicked the ad by creating invisible layers. It's generally the companies that always were "acceptable" that find they've now have to pay extortion money because consumers turned off all the ads, naughty or nice.

Information wants to be free. Creators want to get paid. On an average day at work all I do is manipulate bits and bytes, fortunately for me it can't be copied from anywhere. But what about when the mass market wants something, but it only has a few dollars of value to each? Haven't we had enough stories about Kickstarter where they don't deliver or are plain scams or it's shit and you can't complain because you gave the money away long ago for fluffy promises?

There's advantages to the traditional way where an investor is the one making the commitment, takes the risk, keeping the schedule and consumers just buy the end product when it's done - assuming they like it and the price is right. But then you need to be able to sell it piece-wise, if you have a journalist working a story for ages and the first person to read the article can just give it to everyone for free then you'll only get rehashed press releases and click-bait. A lot of the content out there is crap because they don't have incentive to make real content anymore.

Re:Things

[dave562]

I did not realize that. Thanks for the heads up.

Re:Things

[geminidomino]

All part of the service.

Re:Things

[farble1670]

yes, and generalizing about the many based on your experience with the few is a good way to go about life.

you are saying that since some websites run by some people have annoying ads, you are going to deny ALL websites the ability to support themselves. great.

Re:Things

[TheGratefulNet]

yup. sucks to be a website owner, these days, I guess.

but also sucks to be LOTS of people. I have my problems and don't expect anyone to care about my income issues. I could give a rats ass about their problems, as well.

the internet started out right, then got ruined by ad-men. so, they get what they get. they fucked it all up and this is what we are left with.

I could care less about website operators. if one goes away, 10 more will pop up. like other things, its a race to the bottom.

until we get micropayments and stop the advertising bullshit, I simply will not care. I don't owe them any living, just like they owe me nothing.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

That's a really good point about micropayments, and that one's firmly in the power of the government to fix, by properly regulating the financial sector and enabling micropayments (by eliminating the bogus per-charge fees of $0.30 for each transaction charged by Visa/MC).

Re:Things

[lexman098]

I work for a large tracking agency and would like to speak with you about a business opportunity.

Re:Things

[edtice1559]

I don't like this line of reasoning. I don't care all that much about whether people see ads or not. But it's the same thinking that leads to applying "collective guilt" in situations that really do matter. The logic simply doesn't work. Some intrusive ads have made me angry but so have people of ethnic and religious minorities.

Re:Things

[farble1670]

but also sucks to be LOTS of people. I have my problems and don't expect anyone to care about my income issues. I could give a rats ass about their problems, as well.

it's the difference between inaction and negative action. i'm not taking any action to reduce your income, but you are taking specific actions to reduce the income of website authors. it's not even indirect action.

if you don't like their ads, don't visit the site. that's the ethical thing to do. as it stands you are taking the product that they worked hard to produce and denying them any compensation. it doesn't matter that you think they should be using a micropayment model over ads. that's not your choice. they get to choose their business model - fail of succeed. if you don't like how someone chooses to sell you something or for how much, you don't just take it if you disagree. that logic is just a license to steal everything you want- just rationalize it by claiming something is wrong with the business model.

i'm sure it makes it easier for you that the people behind the sites are nameless, faceless nobodies that you'll never meet in person in a hundred years. that doesn't change the fact that they are people struggling to make ends meet just like you.

in these situations, ask yourself what life would be like if everyone acted like you. well, we'd have about 97% less content on the web. you are essentially letting the masses subsidize your browsing.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

then turn the feature off.. you already have, i'm guessing. plus you probably already use easyprivacy, social annoyances, and malware domain lists. you are set. this is non-news for you. abp was even nice enough to disable it automatically for anyone with easyprivacy list active back when the feature first was added.

they aren't the bad guys, and many people that do block ads (including on this very web site) say it's only because of the obnoxious annoying ones.. well, abp made a solution to that and came up with a policy that can allow the unobnoxious and unannoying ones... so now those people can be happy, and the people who don't want any ads (you, and me, among millions of others) can be happy, too, with the flip of a checkbox.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

I'm a big believer in collective guilt. If you're part of a shitty group which has earned itself a bad reputation, you shouldn't whine when you're lumped in with them. It sucks if you're born into that group and can't willfully leave, so we do need to be much more lenient with groups that people can't leave than with groups that are voluntary, but still, people make generalizations for a good reason: we don't have the time to actually meet every single person in a group and judge them for ourselves. Ethnicities are not voluntary (though it is possible to distance yourself from your ethnic background if you try; it's not that hard to pass yourself off as someone from a different ethnic background many times, by changing the way you talk or the language you speak. You won't get a darkish-skinned Mexican to pass as a Swede, but might pass as an Italian and maybe a middle-easterner), but religions certainly are so I have zero sympathy there.

Some intrusive ads have made me angry but so have people of ethnic and religious minorities.

The important thing to keep in mind with collective guilt is: what proportion of the group has earned the bad reputation? The danger with collective guilt is that it's very easy to grossly mis-estimate the actual proportion of people in the group who are either guilty, or apologists/enablers. We tend to see the worst people in the group and remember them the best, and not see or remember the others.

If it's 0.1% of Mexicans who are doing something shitty and the rest are OK, then it's completely unfair to blame all Mexicans for the actions of the few. Similarly, if it's 0.1% of Muslims murdering people and such, and the rest are extremely peaceful and tolerant, then it's unfair to blame them all.

However, if it's 10% of a group doing something awful, and another 80% cheering them on or covering for them, then as far as I'm concerned I'm going to hold the whole group responsible and treat them accordingly. I really don't give a shit that a puny 10% don't agree with the actions of the majority; if they really cared, they'd leave the group, or at least do whatever they can to distance themselves from it and form their own separate group.

Also important is how your actions affect peoples' lives. Treating people badly because of their ethnicity has serious societal effects. Treating them badly because of their religion also can have pretty big effects. But treating online advertisers poorly is not going to cause a big rift in society and all kinds of social ills, the way segregation or discrimination do. If online ad-men don't like the way people view them, they can go into a different line of work. No one goes to college for a degree in online advertising and gets locked into that as a career path; these people are really nothing more than con artists. If doing shitty advertising tactics online isn't paying the bills for them any more, then can go to work at McDonald's.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

Adblock is an ad blocker. There are other products for anti-tracking. Take a look at noscript and ghostery.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong.

As a site owner, you certainly have the power to demand "only non-intrusive ads on your site". Tell your advertisers: "non-intrusive, or no ads at all." Also, you can enforce this by only allowing text ads - no html. Pays less perhaps - but you have the power. Your site.

Re:Things

[geminidomino]

In Nigeria?

Re:Things

[Last Warrior]

It started out with people just trying to make a little something on the side using a ads on their website.
Then it turned into a way to pay for your website. Then it was a way to make a living.
Then it was a way to better target customers on your website. Then it was a way to track metrics for your website usage.
Then it was a way to track uses across websites. Then it was a way to build a profile about users based on the ad click-through.
Then it was to build a personality profile. At the same time, it was used by malicious and non-malicious companies to infect your computer
with malware and trojans (read: Sony rootkit)

Ive never been a fan of any web advertising. From the very beginning I saw it as a bad business model. Nowadays, people are rebelling
many of the above uses of web advertising. Its not any businesses right to track me once I leave their website. I dont even like to be tracked while I am on their website.

If companies and advertisers went back to just serving small unobtrusive amounts of non-targetted, non-tracking advertisement, then I think more people would be OK with that. Even though I am not fond of it, I think that would be an acceptable cost. The problem is that they want more and more and the people they are taking it from is the user. The user doesn't have any say in what is an acceptable form of advertising.
People either accept it out of ignorance or apathy or they use tools to block out as much of the nonsense that these companies and advertisers try to push onto us. There are other ways to make money on the internet beyond using ad revenue. When people in droves tell you that what you are doing is bad, you shouldn't try to find a way to circumvent their ability to prevent you from doing those bad things. You should try to find a way that is more acceptable to more people.

LW-

Re:Things

[Last Warrior]

To me, this is the same thing as the whole "privacy doesn't exist anymore" statement.
It is used as an excuse to make even more obtrusive and intrusive things and expecting that people will just accept them under the false premise that "privacy doesn't exist anymore". When Mark Zuckersnot first made this claim, it was less of a reality than it was a marketing ploy. If people accept that privacy doesn't exist, then they are more willing to give up more of it. Sure, with the natureof the internet and online communications as well as new technologies, the ability to retain privacy has taken different forms and in some ways has been reduced. One has to examine not only the everyday tools they use but also the ideas and technologies behind them as they all have potentially negative consequences now or in the future.

Not to the point. Just because someone thinks that some business model or business tactic is ok does not make it so. businesses owners and, in particular internet businesses are notoriously lacking in creativity. when one company sees that another company has jumped on the bandwagon for a specific technology, tracking cookies, off-shoring, etc, the rest of us really don't have much recourse unless we want to stop all the offending businesses. We are basically forced to accept these bad ideas. You don't have any idea how much shit I get even after so many years from friends because I don't buy into facebook and thus, do not use it. We could stop using the internet, but that's not really a viable solution. Instead, we have to find other ways to let those businesses know that those tactics are not acceptable while trying to survive in what really is an internet powered world. Just because the herd has bought into this marketing BS, those of us who are more thoughtful of our privacy should be be compelled to join the herd and their lack of forethought.

Re:Things

[farble1670]

Just because someone thinks that some business model or business tactic is ok does not make it so

your choices are to buy my product, or not. your choices do not include stealing my product. if you can't get past that, then you are hopeless friend.

it's the same argument that media pirates take. it's all a rationalization for them to get free shit.

i've viewed pirated content, and i block ads ... but i don't make up some convoluted argument about how what i'm doing is morally justified. i'm just taking things i don't want to pay for.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

your choices are to buy my product, or not. your choices do not include stealing my product.

No one is "stealing" products by viewing web pages without ads. If you don't like it, don't put up a web page. Don't put up a web server that responds to HTTP requests and then bitch when people don't actually download and watch all the ads you've linked to. Don't like it? Don't put up a web page, or put up one with ads embedded (i.e., the ads are JPGs served from the same webserver) so it's virtually impossible to block them automatically. You're too lazy to do that because you want to use doubleclick? Too fucking bad.

This is as stupid as having a shop open to the public, putting up ads in the shop, and then bitching when someone walks in and refuses to look at your ads and doesn't buy anything either. Heck, it's just as bad as having a shop open to the public, and then bitching when people look at your stuff inside and walk out without purchasing anything. Part of having a shop open to the public is that people might not buy anything. Same with a website. There's nothing "immoral" about it, or about blocking ads, just like there's nothing immoral about me refusing to look at freeway billboards.

This has ZERO to do with "piracy" or copyright infringement.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

If companies and advertisers went back to just serving small unobtrusive amounts of non-targetted, non-tracking advertisement, then I think more people would be OK with that.

The non-targeted ads are actually more annoying because they're so irrelevant. I actually like non-obtrusive but relevant ads, like what Google serves in searches (or at least used to, on the right-hand side, separate from the actual search results). Small, all-text ads that actually have something to do with what I'm looking for and don't screw up my viewing of the real content (because they're on the side) can be helpful. Ads for feminine products (I'm male) are not.

Re:Things

[farble1670]

No one is "stealing" products by viewing web pages without ads.

yep, keep telling yourself that.

This is as stupid as having a shop open to the public, putting up ads in the shop, and then bitching when someone walks in and refuses to look at your ads and doesn't buy anything either.

if you viewed the content, you bought something right? why did you even come in the shop in the first place otherwise? the website has an understanding that they provide content, and if you want to view their content, you view the ads which earns them income. you are denying them that income.

There's nothing "immoral" about it, or about blocking ads, just like there's nothing immoral about me refusing to look at freeway billboards.

man, that's such a terrible analogy i don't know where to start. the billboard isn't offering anything but the ad. so yes, if it hasn't offered you any content other than the ad, you have no obligation.

it's simple. you like the content. you want it. but you aren't willing to compensate anyone for providing the content. the content on that site is someone's job. it's how they feed their family and pay their bills. it's no different than consuming any other service and deciding to not pay for it. if you don't like the way the content is delivered, don't consume it. your aren't willing to surf around a little bit to find a site that offers what you want without ads?

it's not like these websites have an option. if you have a blog, or a small news site, no one is going to pay for it. ads are the business model that works, like it or not.

Re:Things

[Grishnakh]

You are so full of shit. There is no "understanding"; that's a fantasy in your and the website owner's mind. I never agreed to any such contract, and there is no such "understanding" in place in any law anywhere.

You want an analogy? How about Netflix? If I want to look through Netflix's movies, and watch a few online, I have to have an account, which of course I have to pay for. If I don't pay for an account, I can't get into the site, at least without hacking or stealing someone's credentials. The site prevents this: you need a username and password to get into the site.

Similarly, any site (like some news site) that are "paywalled" are the same way. You want to view the content, you pay for an account and get a login which you can use to view the content. To get around this requires either stealing someone else's login info, or hacking the site somehow, both of which are clearly far above and beyond what was intended, and akin to breaking or picking the lock of a door on a brick-and-mortar business.

Websites with ads don't have this. They let anyone look at the site just by pointing their browser there, or by clicking on a link. If they don't want people reading their content without paying for it somehow, they can erect a paywall just like NYTimes or other such places.

Just because some moron decides they want to pursue a particular business plan doesn't mean I have to play along with it.

it's simple. you like the content. you want it. but you aren't willing to compensate anyone for providing the content. the content on that site is someone's job. it's how they feed their family and pay their bills.

Boo fucking hoo. If they want to protect it, paywall it. Don't whine when not enough people sign up for it.

Bottom line: no one has a right to earn a living in any particular way.

Re:Things

[farble1670]

You are so full of shit.

i think you may have double-dosed yourself on testosterone this morning. call a dr. immediately.

Bottom line: no one has a right to earn a living in any particular way.

we're not talking about laws. we're talking about you deciding to take something you want with compensating the producer in a way that they've set up. you decided that since technology has allowed you to bypass it, that it's okay.

these type of moral quandaries are easy to figure out. you just have to ask yourself what would happen if everyone acted like you ... what would the situation be like? in this case, we'd have 97% (or whatever) less content on the web because the vast, vast majority of websites that could never survive with paywall model. we'd have major news sites just like all we used to have was major newspapers. personally, an ecosystem where minor plays can survive and compete is good.

you're actions depend on the rest of the world that views the ads, occasionally clicks on them, and earns a meager income for the site owner. if we didn't load those ads, you'd have no content. that's called mooching.

moral quandary solved.

Re:Things

[Anonymous Coward]

we're not talking about laws. we're talking about you deciding to take something you want with compensating the producer in a way that they've set up.

The "producer" of any IP comprises tens of thousands of years of civilisation. One person's claim on their work is just small-minded egomania.

you decided that since technology has allowed you to bypass it, that it's okay.

Without adblocking:
"Can I have this content?" "Here you go."
"Can I have this ad?" "Here you go."

With adblocking:
"Can I have this content?" "Here you go."

It's not tech allowing you to bypass it. The default is not to load the ad. You must make the explicit choice to request an ad.

these type of moral quandaries are easy to figure out. you just have to ask yourself what would happen if everyone acted like you .

If everyone acted like me, Apple would go bankrupt, because I don't buy Apple. Does this mean I have to buy Apple?

in this case, we'd have 97% (or whatever) less content on the web because the vast, vast majority of websites that could never survive with paywall model.

Yes yes and the computer industry could never exist because there is a global market for maybe five of them. Your lack of imagination is not an excuse to impose your will on others.

we'd have major news sites just like all we used to have was major newspapers. personally, an ecosystem where minor plays can survive and compete is good.

The more the 'net has become ad-based, the more it has become dominated by major players. You have it the wrong way round. Ads pay so little that the market ends up being skewed in favour of the big boys.

you're actions depend on the rest of the world that views the ads, occasionally clicks on them, and earns a meager income for the site owner.

You have no evidence for this.

if we didn't load those ads, you'd have no content. that's called mooching.

If nobody loaded the ads, organisations would have to find a different funding model. Don't be a leech who thinks you have a right to profit from a particular funding model.

To be absolutely clear: ads are inefficient. Not only do they waste the reader's time, but they involve money taking a circuitous route of middlemen.

Lastly, if a user doesn't click on any ads, a lot of the time the site gets no money. So, you have two possibilities:

1) Clicking on an ad dishonestly, knowing you won't buy anything;

2) Blocking ads, resulting in no economic difference from not-blocking ads.

Two different products

[Russ1642]

AdBlock - good. AdBlock Plus - crap.

Re:Two different products

[Anonymous Coward]

What about AdBlock Pro?

Re:Two different products

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about AdBlock, but AdBlock Plus is NOT crap on my installs. It even filters out video ads in the middle of online video content, then loads the next video segment without a delay.

Re:Two different products

[Anonymous Coward]

ABP has a dodgy track record. The "Plus" is just marketing bullshit, there's nothing extra about it whatsoever.

Re:Two different products

[Vyse of Arcadia]

IIRC AdBlock was a Chrome extension to fill a niche while AdBlock Plus was still Firefox only. As a Firefox user, why should I care about AdBlock?

Re:Two different products

[number17]

Actually AdBlock is not necessarily good, especially if you use OWA. It inserts NSFW text into the body of emails when using Safari which then gets blocked by Spam filters. AdBlock has finally owned up to the problem almost a year later.

Re:Two different products

[Anonymous Coward]

A developer seemed to acknowledge and explain the problem within a couple of weeks, according to your link. The problem, while hilariously terrible, definitely doesn't look like the product of malicious behavior.

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues!

(Vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)

... apk

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the best ya got vs. apk's documented facts? I'm switching to hosts.

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Just do what the rest of us do, and click the flag and report it like the SPAM that it is.

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

I use both a host file and uBlock. The hosts file blocking doesn't catch ads that are generated though generated inline javascript using inline base64 encoded images. If there is nothing to DNS resolve against, then host blocking doesn't work worth a crap. That is a documented fact.

Also, I hate spamming even more then I hate seeing ads. After seeing how you are completely willing to SPAM, it makes me completely question the legitimacy of your "product".

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[blackomegax]

Abusive spam does not trustworthy make.

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

You prove apk right if all you can do is downmod truth he put up http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Yawn, the APK troll is at it again, trying to spread his idiotic outdated rubbish around, with the usual irrational ranting and poor grammar.

Re:Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Odd you say that: You haven't proved apk wrong http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Opt-out

[pr0nbot]

I'd assume (without further info) that this is about the "allow some non-intrusive advertising" checkbox you get in the filter options. It's on by default, but when you install adblock (as I did a few days ago) it one of the things you go through when the configuration dialog pops up.

It links to: https://adblockplus.org/en/acc...

It's not perfect in that it's on by default, but it's easy enough to disable. Perhaps they could improve it by tying this checkbox to your "do not track" preference?

Re:Opt-out

[ArsonSmith]

I just went in and unchecked it. Thanks. Pretty sure this publicity is having an opposite affect from intention.

Re:Opt-out

[Princeofcups]

I'd assume (without further info) that this is about the "allow some non-intrusive advertising" checkbox you get in the filter options. It's on by default, but when you install adblock (as I did a few days ago) it one of the things you go through when the configuration dialog pops up.

It links to: https://adblockplus.org/en/acc...

It's not perfect in that it's on by default, but it's easy enough to disable. Perhaps they could improve it by tying this checkbox to your "do not track" preference?

And strangely enough there are people who WANT to see non-intrusive, correctly targeted ads. I'm not one of them, but my wife is. I'd have to call this one a feature, albeit not properly explained in the setup.

Re:Opt-out

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't WANT to see ads, but I'm ok enough with unobtrusive ones that I leave that on.

Re:Opt-out

[Anonymous Coward]

And strangely enough there are people who WANT to see non-intrusive, correctly targeted ads.

This comes down to a matter of personality. Some people block ads because they're self-entitled assholes. Other people block ads because (possibly) different entitled assholes have ensured that their ads are as obnoxious as possible.

Bound to happen

[Andrio]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff. People also don't want to have to directly pay for things (plus, could you imagine if every website was paywalled?)

Seems to me that the best solution is to just run unintrusive ads. People don't really mind ads all that much, they just hate it when they're noisy (literally and metaphorically) and get in the way

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

(plus, could you imagine if every website was paywalled?)

People would play a lot more solitaire.

Re: Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

it also isn't sustainable for every company to pay off all makers of ad-blocking software. What is sustainable is for these companies to charge people to use their sites.

Re:Bound to happen

[Bigbutt]

Sorry, as long as ad companies occasionally accept ads by malware companies, I'll keep running ad blocking software.

[John]

Re:Bound to happen

[sdoca]

Totally agree!

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff. People also don't want to have to directly pay for things (plus, could you imagine if every website was paywalled?)

Seems to me that the best solution is to just run unintrusive ads. People don't really mind ads all that much, they just hate it when they're noisy (literally and metaphorically) and get in the way

Ummm, I don't understand your point. No one clicks on ads when they pop up. They're just an annoyance factor. So what's the difference in terms of revenue for the company between 100% of people not clicking on their ads vs 100% of people using some adblock software? Absolutely nothing. All this effort that Google, Microsoft and Amazon is wasting is all for nothing.

Re:Bound to happen

[ColdWetDog]

I'm not particularly interested in the 'sustainability' of the Internet. Google and a couple of other companies that have more money than the Catholic Church can worry about that. I'm interested in my privacy and peace of mind.

Re: Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

You're very wrong. I loathe ads and block all of them. Advertising is a cancer and I'll be damned if I let even the smallest one in.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

All ads are malware, and I will block all ads. Your shitty business model is not my problem.

Re:Bound to happen

[pjt33]

could you imagine if every website was paywalled?

No, I can't imagine that. In particular, I can't imagine paywalling my own site (or putting ads on it). I remember the days before advertising was big on the web, when content was provided by universities and hobbyists. Comparing the web now with the web then, I suspect that the death of online advertising would harm clickbait sites more than ones with valuable content.

Re:Bound to happen

[OhPlz]

Ads pay for television, yet I haven't seen any major disruption given the popularity of DVRs.

Re:Bound to happen

[WCMI92]

I'm not particularly interested in the 'sustainability' of the Internet. Google and a couple of other companies that have more money than the Catholic Church can worry about that. I'm interested in my privacy and peace of mind.

I am not going to cry if the commercial ventures on the Internet die. IMHO, the Internet was better back in 1994-5 anyway when it largely was NOT commercial!

Back in those days when you clicked on the DOWNLOAD button, (gasp) a file downloaded! Not prompt you through 6 more screens and clicks. Articles rendered as a single page instead of "click whoring" you through a dozen pages.

If those lowbrow tactics quit yielding money they will stop.

And sites like Amazon which I go to when I WANT to buy something will always be there.

Re:Bound to happen

[JohnFen]

People don't really mind ads all that much, they just hate it when they're noisy (literally and metaphorically) and get in the way

I don't mind ads as such, but what I do mind more than anything else -- more than being noisy and obnoxious -- is the tracking that comes with them. That's why I block all advertising that I can, and why I always will.

Re:Bound to happen

[LordOfTheCows]

Since I have never seen an online ad which has prompted me to click on it (much less buy the advertised product), it could be argued that by blocking ads, I am actually helping the site to make money by not pointlessly reducing its click-through rate. Of course, I'm assuming that click-through rates matter, because really, what's the point of ads of any kind if you don't look at them? Branding? Bah. If every web site is pay-through, I'll find something else to do.

Re:Bound to happen

[Grishnakh]

No one clicks on ads when they pop up. They're just an annoyance factor.

Wrong. Pop-up ads were entirely successful, otherwise companies wouldn't have continued to do them for so long. No, no one you knew clicked on them, but some small minority of web users did, and that made it profitable. It's just like infomercials and telemarketers and many other annoying marketing things; they don't need to work on the majority of the populace, just a large enough (but still tiny) idiotic minority to make it profitable, and they'll keep doing it until legislation prevents it. The thing that finally killed pop-ups was that browsers all started blocking them by default because most users were so fed up with them.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff.

It's perfectly sustainable, but it wouldn't be the same web. *Never* forget that the early world wide web wasn't dominated by advertising. The only reason websites sustained by advertising appeared is because the web (and the internet) are sustainable without them.

Re:Bound to happen

[Deathlizard]

The problem is even the unobtrusive ads are virus filled. Do any search for any major software package (Examples: VLC Media player, 7-Zip, Libreoffice) on any of the major search engines to see what I mean. I get no less then 3 virus infections per week just by people clicking on those types of ads.

It was much better when Google, Bing, and Yahoo put a big colored box around the ads so you can know for certain what your searching for. Google just has the yellow Ad gif now, and yahoo and bing just says "Ads related to" text which just blends into the real search results. I won't even talk about Ask. DuckDuckGo seems to seperate better since it lists official sites but even they just do the Ad gif thing google does.

I'll turn them back on when they clearly label what an ad is so that even an computer idiot can tell they're fake results and they actually screen ad URL's for misleading or malicious content (Not just for malicious scripts and the like. Obviously fake Installer Trojans that you download and execute are bad too), until then, unobtrusive ads stays off.

Re:Bound to happen

[grimmjeeper]

I don't know the percentages but I do know that the cable TV and satellite companies kick some of their subscriber fees to the networks they rebroadcast. So ads only partially pay for television. The rest is subscriber fees.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't clicked on an ad in five years of not using an adblocker, so with the blocker actually I'm just helping my ISP save bandwidth, and slightly improving the site's conversion rate by removing useless ad views.

Re:Bound to happen

[Fnord666]

I don't mind ads as such, but what I do mind more than anything else -- more than being noisy and obnoxious -- is the tracking that comes with them. That's why I block all advertising that I can, and why I always will.

And the drive-by malware. Don't forget about the malware that makes it into even the best of ad networks.

Re:Bound to happen

[nehumanuscrede]

If your company exists and relies solely on advertising to fund operational costs, you're doing it wrong.

Ads are annoying at best, and downright dangerous at their worst. It's the latter reason folks block them. Too many times advertisements have been used as an attack vector to deliver some trojan / virus / malware. For that reason alone I block all ads. Adblock, Ghostery and I'm working on a proxy solution to remove them from the data stream all-together before they even clear my router.

If you don't take a stand against unlimited advertising now, the internet will look a lot like Cable TV does eventually.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

No company has more money that the Catholic Church Corporation, it's global theft ring rakes in billions a week with no taxes, little overhead and a treasure trove of the worlds treasures that they stole over the centuries that they've been around.

Don't even get me started about the den of pedophiles and homosexuals that make up a majority of the Catholic leadership.

Re:Bound to happen

[Austerity Empowers]

I'm not sure that we wouldn't be better off without the internet content that is ad supported, particularly the ads I want blocked which play sound without my permission, use javascript for anything at all, pop over content or are otherwise intrusive and annoying.

The internet used to be both functional and informational before ads, and legitimate businesses will still be able to peddle their wares.

Re:Bound to happen

[WCMI92]

And the drive-by malware. Don't forget about the malware that makes it into even the best of ad networks.

That is one reason I use ad blockers. NONE of the ad networks (including Google) do a fucking thing to keep malware off their networks. They have no standards for content and do no policing whatsoever. And by being so irresponsible they are INVITING the FTC to start forcing regulation on them.

If I said malware was THE reason I use blockers I'd be lying. I hate ads. I do not find ANY advertising to be acceptable. Indeed, I avoid ads on purpose.

Am I stealing by turning down the radio when an ad comes on or changing the station? Am I stealing by leaving the room and muting the TV when the commercials come on?

Re:Bound to happen

[meta-monkey]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff. People also don't want to have to directly pay for things (plus, could you imagine if every website was paywalled?)

Burn it to the ground and little of value will be lost. The tracking, the loss of privacy isn't worth it. If the current system is unsustainable without ads, a new system will take its place. I would support sites I find useful with dollars, like when I bought a subscription to Slashdot. Let content come from hobbyists, supported by donations.

The sustainability of Gawker and FaceBook are not my concern.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

What matters is whether advertisers suspect that everybody is running ad blocking software. As long as they are under the impression that a large percentage is not, they will carry on throwing money into ads, whether or not they make a difference.

Re:Bound to happen

[Chas]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable

Blame the admongers.

Small, unobtrusive ads on a site, nobody really gives a shit about these.

But huge, noisy, flashing, screen-stealing, malware-injecting, movement tracking crap from the unscrupulous ad community is what drove people to create this stuff IN THE FIRST PLACE.

What you're doing is blaming a vaccine for the disease.

Re: Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Like, stop advertising your opinions, dude ! We don't want to see that.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. I very much miss the "good old day" when the Internet was nascent and full of hobbyist and other sites that contained actual information. I even miss GeoCities and AngelFire sites; some of them were actually very useful.

I remember AltaVista and good metasearch engines that didn't attempt to track you three ways to Sunday.

HotBot, AltaVista, proper, unadulterated Yahoo, Lycos, gophernet, archie, veronica, newsgroups, usenet...

Re:Bound to happen

[NostalgiaForInfinity]

No institution or corporation has more money than the Catholic church; not even close. http://www.slate.com/articles/...

Re:Bound to happen

[quantaman]

I'm not particularly interested in the 'sustainability' of the Internet. Google and a couple of other companies that have more money than the Catholic Church can worry about that. I'm interested in my privacy and peace of mind.

What about the smaller companies who can't afford to pay off AdBlock Plus? I'd prefer Google and those couple other companies to have real competition in the form of small startups who run unintrusive ads.

Re:Bound to happen

[quantaman]

could you imagine if every website was paywalled?

No, I can't imagine that. In particular, I can't imagine paywalling my own site (or putting ads on it). I remember the days before advertising was big on the web, when content was provided by universities and hobbyists. Comparing the web now with the web then, I suspect that the death of online advertising would harm clickbait sites more than ones with valuable content.

So without advertising or some form of payments say goodbye to Google, Facebook, Twitter, online newspapers, and Slashdot.

You don't use any of those sites do you?

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff.

You know what else pays for a lot of "stuff" in business? This stuff called cash.

Bottom line is ads are not a loss to anyone except those who think we still need them around. Kind of like the Yellow Pages, we have 872 other ways of finding the same information these days.

Value in advertising? How about we figure out the point first.

Take a hard look at the Super Bowl ads, and how many of them were simply trying to drive random feel-good points across rather than sell a specific product. They've got 30 seconds, and they choose to showcase fatherhood or 'Murica instead of the product. Oh yeah, I can see how that kind of stupid shit really "pays" for a lot of stuff when it costs the company millions to buy that airtime.

$4 million can fund a LOT of "stuff" instead of pissing it away in 30 seconds.

Re:Bound to happen

[CauseBy]

As long as ad companies occasionally show ads, I'll keep running ad blocking software.

Re:Bound to happen

[CauseBy]

Compare the early internet to early FM radio. Both were awesome, then were ruined when Business majors showed up. Content controlled by unmoneyed rabble is superior.

Re:Bound to happen

[penix1]

it's global theft ring rakes in billions a week with no taxes...

And how is that different from Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc...? They make billions and haven't paid taxes in years either?

Re:Bound to happen

[WCMI92]

I didn't get my first FM radio (ironically) 6 months before my first computer (1981), so most of my early memories of radio was AM radio, back when AM still had DJ's and played music. I never remembered epic blocks of 10 minutes of straight commercials back then as they do now.

Re:Bound to happen

[Actually, I do RTFA]

So without advertising or some form of payments say goodbye to Google, Facebook, Twitter, online newspapers, and Slashdot.

Umm... yay? I'll give up Slashdot in a heartbeat if that means people will give up expecting to communicate with me on Twitter or Facebook.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Lexus made no bones about their advertising being all about the cars themselves. Nissan? blech.

Re:Bound to happen

[houghi]

I do mind it. I mind all ads. Be it on the street. Be it written on my underwear. I do not want it and if possible I will avoid it. Or as Banksy said:

People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you're not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you.

You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.

Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.

You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don't owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Cloud-based distributed search engines - technically feasible with user-donated CPU time, memory and storage.
Facebook - people can very well migrate to diaspora.
Twitter - that's not really that computing-intensive, is it? Should be pretty easily replaceable.
Slashdot - enough people will donate to maintain it, I believe.

There, problem solved :-)

Re:Bound to happen

[cyberchondriac]

So do subscribers. I'm paying Comcast nearly $100 a month for the privilege of watching material which comprises about 35% commercials, if not more. I gotta cut that cable.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

You're making me feel really old...

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot's roots are as a hobby site and it still maintains some of that air about it, which is one of the reasons why I still frequent here. Online newspapers are increasingly paywalling and the rest of the lot demand your personal info so they can better target ads to you. The web was better when it was universities, government, and hobbyists. Universities and government provided valuable services for the better of humanity, such as a genome database. And the hobbyists existed to create a community out of passion. The community was made of passionate people. They might even kick a few bucks to the community owner for his or her trouble.

Google has its place as a search engine, but they started as a university project. Facebook and Twitter are just modern versions of various messaging services and there's no reason they actually have to exist.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Useless, Completely useless, Extremely useless, vaguely useless, Slashdot

Half of those deserve to crash and burn.

Re:Bound to happen

[quantaman]

Sorry, as long as ad companies occasionally accept ads by malware companies, I'll keep running ad blocking software.

[John]

I'm considering starting a website, I actually think it would be very useful, and I have every intention of making it respect users privacy as much as possible and keeping the advertising as minimal, ethical, and unobtrusive as possible.

It will cost significant money to run, it will cost money every single page view. I'll probably do something like Google Contributor to offer ad-free versions, but I doubt that will be more than an error bar in revenue.

So how do you suggest I actually manage to make my potential website sustainable? Do I simply hope that people like you are a small enough minority that it's profitable?

Re:Bound to happen

[farble1670]

If you don't take a stand against unlimited advertising now, the internet will look a lot like Cable TV does eventually.

why don't you "take a stand" by not visiting those sites? websites have a right to include ads. there's no other viable method to earn a profit for most. do you think google search would have been successful in any way if they'd charged even some nominal fee for usage?

If your company exists and relies solely on advertising to fund operational costs, you're doing it wrong.

adverts have primarily driven the growth of the internet. ads allow us to consume many services where we'd otherwise we micro-paymented to death. it's not the micropayment amount, it's that people are (rightly) wary of having tens or hundreds of different services billing their card. it gets out of control and hard to manage.

like most things, the truth is somewhere in the middle here. popup malware is bad, but taking a black and white view of advertising is naive.

Re:Bound to happen

[farble1670]

Burn it to the ground and little of value will be lost

i know. how about you use the for-pay adverts-less services you want, and let other people make whatever choice they want? the idea that you need to "burn to the ground" things you don't agree with is pretty sad.

personally, i feel like google is giving me an incredible value. really, all of their web services, android, google android apps + services ... for what? for them to know various trivialities about my life?

Let content come from hobbyists, supported by donations.

that's naive. adverts have driven the growth of the internet. it's not just the end user websites. the infrastructure is paid for by companies that pay other companies to build upgrade and maintain it.

Re:Bound to happen

[stephanruby]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff.

If ads are no longer sustainable, it won't be the fault of ad blocking software. It will be the fault of the ads themselves.

There is actually an entire spectrum of advertisements, and Adblock doesn't block all of them. On Craigslist for instance, it's actually helpful that potential employers and potential landlords pay significant fees for each listing, it helps keep the noise down from third party recruiters and third party brokers that would flood those categories with too many listings otherwise.

Also for the sites that don't abuse the system of advertisements, it's easy enough to disable that ad-bocking software for the particular site you're on with just a right-click of the mouse. Generally speaking thought, people don't install ad blocking software unless there is a web site constantly pushing the boundaries of how many ads they'll serve you. The latest culprit being Hulu for instance.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

If they're small enough Adblock Plus doesn't charge them to include acceptably unobtrusive ads.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Only one, and to be frank if this site died I'd find more useful things to do with my time.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

... I hate ads. I do not find ANY advertising to be acceptable. Indeed, I avoid ads on purpose.

Am I stealing by turning down the radio when an ad comes on or changing the station? Am I stealing by leaving the room and muting the TV when the commercials come on?

Welcome to the over 50 crowd, your not the audience they want. Try answering a marketing survey when they call you randomly, tell them your age is 50+ and they mostly just hang up.

I only take surveys to screw with them and they probably know that.

Re:Bound to happen

[sandytaru]

I whitelist specific sites that I believe deserve my revenue. For example, webcomics, if the artist asks me nicely. Or I pay the website that offers a premium, ad-free experience the fee they want me to pay to justify their content creation or my bandwith usage (I pay for digital FM premium just to shut the ads up, since they are all audio.)

The point is that it's MY choice to pay for the reduced advertising experience, thanks to AdBlock.

Re:Bound to happen

[jafiwam]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff. People also don't want to have to directly pay for things (plus, could you imagine if every website was paywalled?)

Seems to me that the best solution is to just run unintrusive ads. People don't really mind ads all that much, they just hate it when they're noisy (literally and metaphorically) and get in the way

Until the unsustainability point is reached, nobody gives a shit.

How about this, YOU PAY ME to show me ads. I use that account to micro-pay for the content I want to see (without ads). This will be a de-facto support of the good or wanted content on the internet by the people who want to exploit the internet. Remember, my eyeballs are the PRODUCT not the target.

Then I can choose my level of consumption to fit my annoyance, and you get to stay in business.

Ads are not just annoying, they are a threat to the stability of the computer and the integrity of the data on it; therefore are also a financial and criminal risk to the person who user it. You can't tell me you've never had a friend or old relative get infected with some shit right? Ever hear of cryptoblocker? It gets in, through ad networks exploiting security holes.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometimes the ad networks are hacked and used to spread malware:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malvertising

This has been happening a lot with all the Flash vunerabilities lately

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

A power vacuum of that size won't go unfilled, and you know it.

With the collapse of any one of the big players, thousands of wannabees will fill the void, improve on the service, avoid the same mistakes that led to the big player's downfall, and generally improve things (or, in some cases, suck less).

Think back a few years, when MySpace was king of social media. It faltered. Did the world end? Did the internet as you knew it in 2005 die, never to return to its former glory? No and no. Now think back to a decade before that, when none of that existed yet. Did you care that you couldn't log in to Twitter? We'll tally that up in the "no" column too.

Without advertising or some form of payments, they'll either figure out a real revenue stream or they weren't a long-term winner anyway. Nothing of value will be lost, pretty much by definition.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't miss any of them.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

While this may be true, and it may be sad that some businesses will die off, but I will keep adblock on in order to be safe. Ads serve up malware very often. Ads have historically been extremely agressive, sucking up my bandwidth and making the internet seem much slower than it really is. Ads historically have used obnoxious techniques to get in my face; popups, animation, sounds, etc. If most of these internet ads had appeared on television the FCC would have taken action.

So for all those businesses (and the wannabe businesses like hobby blogs) who rely on ad revenue, it is time to discover a new method of making your cash. Otherwise you need to start policing yourself and stop tolerating the bad players, stop overusing javascript (or stop using it altogether!), stop using third parties to serve up ads on your behalf (if you're a hobbyist blogger then please hand select every ad you serve up).

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of these ads are served up by third parties, the actual web site trying to be visited is not selecting the ads themselves. This is the root of much of the problem. People have they blogs and are attempting to be wannabe journalists or the like, and they go with a service that serves the ads on their behalf. If this sort of thing happened with print material then the owner would be complaining to the ad companies that the customers are being driven away and would soon start choosing a more responsible advertising agency. But on the web it's different. The blogers want to make their extra $3000 a year so they won't complain to the abusive people who are shoving in all the ads, instead adding a "please don't block ads, I need the money!" message.

Better to stop pleading with the viewers and start pleading with the abusive ad companies instead.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Hobbyists are still on the internet. They're part of the problem though, rather than pay for the hobby out of their pockets they want to get some revenue. So they use third party services to supply ads.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree 100%, the best solution is A) Boycott businesses that have ads you get infected by, B) Ignore the other ads you come across, or even C) Look at ads to get yourself excited about more consumerism - it's a proven fact that Coca-cola tastes better once you're brainwashed to love it.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Key word, some form of payments. I pay for my news ( non-mainstream where facts are served not an agenda ) as well as sites I enjoy visiting, like wikipedia. You don't need advertising, and at least when referring to advertising use the real name for it propaganda. If you find that word harsh or bs, you don't know the history of modern advertising.

We no longer need propaganda to be everywhere, seen and heard hundreds of times in a typical day for westerns, it has gone beyond the purpose of keeping us informed of new products and is now used to manipulate us into buying things to cover emotional needs. As we spread the understanding of cognition and reasoning to the general public I hope to see people demand that propaganda be outlawed and to prevent out governments from allowing third parties to manipulate us, it'll take a little longer to stop governments themselves from using propaganda sadly.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone running ad blocking software is not sustainable, since ads pay for a lot of stuff.

Wrong. There were content, before ads. We oldies remember when the web arrived. It took years before we had search engines, and more years before we got ads. Still, there were content, by people who "had something they wanted to say/share". If the ad-based internet fails outright, no problem for me. Because there is more, and the more interesting parts were always driven by enthusiasm, not ad money.

Ads are actually detrimental, it is tempting to adjust content so it sells more ads. And that makes the content duller, the masses doesn't have refined tastes and advertisers don't want to offend anyone :-(

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have only profits in mind, then sure, it is not 'sustainable'.

However, if you do it as a social project, get the grassroots going and crowdfund from the public when necessary, then it is totally sustainable.

People don't really mind ads all that much

No... ads are an annoyance, though people have different thresholds of annoyance.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

No, all those types of sites existed before the online ad industry.

I host a website off my personal home connection. It costs me nothing. Plenty of people do the same. What we'd lose is all the clickbait and that's a good thing. We'll go back to single page articles and less annoying graphics. Pages will become less bloated.

Re:Bound to happen

[wvmarle]

I'm not particularly interested in the 'sustainability' of the Internet. Google and a couple of other companies that have more money than the Catholic Church can worry about that. I'm interested in my privacy and peace of mind.

I am not going to cry if the commercial ventures on the Internet die. IMHO, the Internet was better back in 1994-5 anyway when it largely was NOT commercial!

Define "commercial".

I have a web site that I pay for and maintain myself. It's a purely commercial web site, yet it's free and there are no ads: this as it's the front of my company. It's advertising my tour business, and is visited by people that are interested in my tours, and allows them to book tickets to tours. I also add general information on hiking in Hong Kong, which people may use to set out by themselves. It's set up for purely commercial reasons, and I think such commercial sites are by and large a great addition to the Internet. I'm using such sites myself: to find information on products, to order stuff from. The Internet would lose a lot of its value if such commercial sites would all disappear and we would have to resort to calling companies, visiting their shops (which may be the other side of the world) to get a catalogue, etc.

For my business it is a great help to have this site, I sell a lot through it. It makes the whole ticket sales easier as well (very little manual interaction from my side needed). I wouldn't want to do without - people can't find me nor can they easily get the information about my tours that they need to make a decision on whether to join, ticket sales would become cumbersome; basically I'd have to close this part of my business.

What would be great if lots of this "targeted advertising" and collection of personal information goes. So I'm still running AdBlock Plus and Flashblock, and recently installed Self Destruct Cookies - an add-on that destroys cookies moments after you leave the site. Sure you have to re-login all the time, which LastPass makes dead easy, it does take care of most of the tracking across sites by outfits like Google and Facebook. This is just one aspect of the commercialisation of the Internet, something that my commercial use of the network can perfectly do without. I'm even collecting only the most basic information of my clients: name (I don't care if it's their real name - they just have to give me that name when they show up at the start), telephone and e-mail. All I need to be able to contact them, and for them to claim their place on the tour.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Speak for yourself. I don't want to see any ads at all. Just as I would prefer to filter out not just 90% of spam email, but all of it. Every ad that makes it through the filter is an annoyance and a security risk. I couldn't care less if that destroys some people's business model.

Re:Bound to happen

[JohnFen]

I'm considering starting a website

I've started a number of websites, some quite popular, and have never needed to put ads on any of them. Unless your website is getting a truly tremendous amount of traffic, hosting is very, very cheap. Most of my sites cost me around $20/mo for hosting fees. That's easily sustainable out of pocket, even if you just have a minimum wage job. On the more popular ones, I mitigated some of that cost by a combination of a donation button and selling merch. None of that earned me a profit, but it did keep the operating costs low enough that it they were easily sustainable.

I would never consider putting ads on a website I run if those ads were through an ad exchange or hosted elsewhere. Third party ads are completely untrustworthy in terms of user privacy, so I would want to be certain they weren't doing the usual nefarious things that ads do. If I wanted a website to actually earn a living for myself, I'd make it a membership site and skip the ads entirely.

Re:Bound to happen

[JohnFen]

I forgot this part:

I'll probably do something like Google Contributor to offer ad-free versions, but I doubt that will be more than an error bar in revenue.

Don't do it that way. There are too many people who would be willing to pay you money, but wouldn't be willing to do it through Google Contributer. You'd be limiting potential contribution sources by using it (unless you did it in addition to other mechanisms.)

Re:Bound to happen

[JohnFen]

taking a black and white view of advertising is naive.

It would be a lot easier to take a nuanced point of view if I could even come up with a single internet ad company that didn't behave in a reprehensible fashion. But I can't. Even the "well behaved" ones insist on spying on you.

Re:Bound to happen

[RyoShin]

plus, could you imagine if every website was paywalled?

I can imagine various micropayment services popping up, where a user pays the company $X dollars and a site enrolled with it gets a small cut for every hit the user generates on their site.[1]

I can also imagine the cries of a thousand thousand people as their websites dedicated to clickbait and content re-posting suddenly go up in flames. And I will be there to hand out marshmallows and sticks to all who want to watch...

[1] Some of this is already happening, with things like Kickstarter/IndieGoGo/FundMe and Patreon leading the way. The former focus on large influxes for projects, and having another influx for each project or to continue a project past its original sunset; the latter focuses on small amounts at a steady pace, with users paying $1 and up per month to fund who/whatever and for access to supporter goodies. If ad revenue dies, one of these companies will have something out shortly to do the same for websites in general.

Re:Bound to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you group those into the Burn & Not Burn category? Which half of which site gets to burn and which survives?

Re:Bound to happen

[Bigbutt]

Got me. Not my job to figure out your business model. I have several sites I've built for personal and use by others. None of them are generating money but that's not why I put them up. Should I start getting a bunch of traffic, I'd have to flip on some sort of nagging system and a request for voluntary payment then if it wasn't helping, install a block for mandatory payment. That would have people either pay to stay or go elsewhere and it won't be costing me money any more.

What makes the information on your site valuable enough that you think you should be paid for it?

[John]

Re:Bound to happen

[quantaman]

Got me. Not my job to figure out your business model.

Though you're apparently happy to rule out the standard business model.

I have several sites I've built for personal and use by others. None of them are generating money but that's not why I put them up.

That's irrelevant.

I've fixed my car for fun, I've grown food for fun, that doesn't mean I don't believe auto mechanism or farmers should work for free.

Should I start getting a bunch of traffic, I'd have to flip on some sort of nagging system and a request for voluntary payment then if it wasn't helping, install a block for mandatory payment. That would have people either pay to stay or go elsewhere and it won't be costing me money any more.

That's a valid business model for some kinds of sites where you build a strong personal relationship with the user and don't intend to scale. But for most others it's completely impractical.

What makes the information on your site valuable enough that you think you should be paid for it?

[John]

I think it's valuable enough that people will come to use it for the price of seeing a small unobtrusive ad. Why do I need more justification than that?

Re:Bound to happen

[Bigbutt]

I guess it would depend on where you got the ad from. One of the forums I frequent has locally hosted, forum topic specific ads. There are vendors who pay for those spots and they're not blocked by the ad blocker. If you were doing that, someone would have to add your ads to the blocker filter for them to be filtered out.

The concern I have lies with the malware that's occasionally injected. I run the ad blocker so I'm not vulnerable.

I will note that I make it a point to not click on ads, even on that forum, all that's happening is I'm getting an impression of the subject of the ad and no click-through revenue goes to you.

[John]

Re:Bound to happen

[quantaman]

I guess it would depend on where you got the ad from. One of the forums I frequent has locally hosted, forum topic specific ads. There are vendors who pay for those spots and they're not blocked by the ad blocker. If you were doing that, someone would have to add your ads to the blocker filter for them to be filtered out.

The concern I have lies with the malware that's occasionally injected. I run the ad blocker so I'm not vulnerable.

The malware is a legitimate concern.

I will note that I make it a point to not click on ads, even on that forum, all that's happening is I'm getting an impression of the subject of the ad and no click-through revenue goes to you.

[John]

Why do you make it a point not to click on them? Malware avoidance or principle? I actually will try to click the Google search ads if they're useful.

Here's my fundamental issue with your position. For a huge portion of the internet ads are the only viable model, either director or disguised as native content (which is worse and harder to block). Unless someone makes a widespread mircopayment model universal adoption of ad-blockers would mean a ton of useful sites (/. and Google included) would shut down.

I think of it a bit like torrenting, there are times when it's understandable, but you're effectively leeching off the people who play by the rules. They're fundamentally unsustainable practices.

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

I don't mind some ads...

[MitchellThompson]

Its the ones that cover the whole screen, have someone who talks over the speakers, or force me to find a tiny hide button that I want blocked. So far, i have not found that Google, Microsoft, or Amazon do this. (SO FAR.....) Also, i run a site that uses Google Doubleclick for Publishing that houses some ads as part of the site's content. They are not obtrusive and you would mistake it for the site's content. Adblock will block them though, even though they are just in-house ads for my own content on the same site.

Re:I don't mind some ads...

[Wycliffe]

I don't mind some ads...

Not only do I not mind some ads but I even occasionally click on ads that look interesting.
One thing that I find annoying is that many times an ad catches my eye just as I'm leaving
the page so I click the back button but when I do the ad that I wanted to look at has been
replaced with a different ad. Advertisers (slashdot included) need to have a way for you to
scroll back and look at previously shown ad. This feature could only help them but hardly
anyone seems to do it.

Re:I don't mind some ads...

[wvmarle]

With click-through rates in the ppm range nowadays, that's probably not worth the effort.

Lots of advertising on the Internet is probably going back to basics: designed as non-interactive, like in newspapers or magazines, just making sure people see a brand name again and again and that way when they are in a shop making a decision to buy a phone, they go for the brand that they know so well from the advertising.

Extortion

[msobkow]

The whole scheme just smacks of extortion. The vendors have already paid the ad companies. I use such software in the good faith that it's going to block the ads.

If it stops blocking the ads, I'll switch to a different ad-blocker. I'm not interested in seeing ANY ads, regardless of whether the product vendor has been paid off for them or not. *I* wasn't paid for *my* time!

Re:Extortion

[oodaloop]

*I* wasn't paid for *my* time!

Nor did you pay for the free service you're enjoying, you self-entitled twat.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

you were compensated for your time/energy/bandwidth with free web content.

Re:Extortion

[jellomizer]

So you are for a feature that you pay a monthly fee to an ad-block agency that will take the bulk of your fee and pay money for the sites you are visiting. So the web sites that you benefit from visiting (If you don't benefit from it then why are you visiting them?) will be able to get revenue from your you visit, help pay the expense that you are generating by visiting the site and help the people who run the site make money to feed their families.

Re:Extortion

[Wycliffe]

*I* wasn't paid for *my* time!

Sure you are. You are being paid in content, software, etc... You aren't getting nothing in return, you
are getting the priviledge of using facebook, slashdot, google, etc... If a large percentage of users all
started using ad blocking software then places like google, slashdot, and facebook would either have
to start charging or even worse start doing secret product placement. I much prefer ads that I know
are ads to tainted content and tainted search results.

Re:Extortion

[Bigbutt]

There are paywalled sites that seem to be doing well enough. If your site is worth something, why not charge for access? If it's worth something to me, something more than a free site that I can adblock, then I'll pay for access. I've done it in the past.

Until accessing your ad infested site (and I use 'infested' on purpose) guarantees I won't get some malware or other drive by load of poo, I will block ads.

[John]

Re:Extortion

[gstoddart]

Hey, these companies put their stuff up freely available on the internet, and make no attempt to block us.

If they think that magically confers some obligation on us to look at every damned ad their website serves, they're full of crap. How many times to ads end up serving malware? Do they take any responsibility for that? Or just say "wasn't us"?

They may think they have some magic click-through license, but I'll be damned if I think all of those analytics and ad companies should have access to all that. I'm not conducting a transaction with those companies, I'm viewing your publicly available website which makes no effort to keep me out.

Not my problem about your ads.

Don't want me to block your ads, make your site subscription based and block me out entirely.

But don't act like I'm somehow ripping you off. Since their privacy policy is crap, we're just enacting our own.

Scorecard research, doubleclick, quantserve, and literally HUNDREDS of other companies ... their product is information about me. But I never signed up for that.

So if some billion dollar media company wants to piss and moan that I'm not watching their ads ... fuck 'em, stop me.

I rank this crap right up there with "by reading this billboard you agree to have this 3rd party company rifle through your wallet". Yeah, no, there's as many as 30 third parties on a lot of sites ... and I've signed a contract with NONE of them.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

Then he'd complain that the adblocking company is tracking his actions online (which would be required to properly pay the correct sites the proper 'ad fees').

He wants...no deserves an ad free, payment free internet since his time is valuable and him spending time on a free page is enough compensation for whoever is running that page.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're not able to generate a profit then you need to change your business model...you self-entitled twat.

Re:Extortion

[msobkow]

It's funny to me how many of you have been brainwashed into believing ads are a "necessary" evil. They're not. Some of the sites I visit on a regular basis have NO advertising at all, because their owners BELIEVE in what they're putting out as content instead of seeing it just as a way to MAKE MONEY.

To a festering hell with spammers and advertisers. If I want a product, I'll *find* it when I can afford it. Until then, piss off.

Re:Extortion

[mwvdlee]

*I* wasn't paid for *my* time!

Yes you were. You were paid with content you wanted to see.

Re:Extortion

[jdavidb]

If a large percentage of users all started using ad blocking software then places like google, slashdot, and facebook would either have to start charging or even worse start doing secret product placement.

Or be donor supported like PBS. I love donor supported websites.

Re:Extortion

[JohnFen]

So you are for a feature that you pay a monthly fee to an ad-block agency that will take the bulk of your fee and pay money for the sites you are visiting

Absolutely not. But I will (and do, when the option is available) pay the sites directly.

Re:Extortion

[itzly]

Actually, I'm doing them a favour by blocking ads, since I'm unlikely to buy their stuff anyway.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

Your search results are already tainted. Try searching for the same item on two different and well used computers. The results from Google will be different for both. Why? Simply because Google already filters your query based on past searches and visited sites.

Re:Extortion

[WCMI92]

There are paywalled sites that seem to be doing well enough. If your site is worth something, why not charge for access? If it's worth something to me, something more than a free site that I can adblock, then I'll pay for access. I've done it in the past.

Until accessing your ad infested site (and I use 'infested' on purpose) guarantees I won't get some malware or other drive by load of poo, I will block ads.

By all means, paywall. Sites like the New York Times try it. And they've found that it has made them irrelevant on the Internet, so they are loosening and may eventually drop it.

Fact of the matter is, there aren't any "professional" journalists anymore that do their jobs so well they deserve to be paid to read their crap, OR to put up with blinking, throbbing, pop over, pop under, cover up the content advertisements.

Especially since so-called "professional" journalists and news organizations get scooped by the "amateurs" every time, something that goes back to the 1990's and Matt Drudge (a name I expect to get modded down just for mentioning). But the fact he changed reporting FOREVER cannot be denied.

The Internet was the END of any corporate/politically biased media organization's ability to CONTROL what news is disseminated and what is hidden FOREVER.

Re:Extortion

[Wycliffe]

Your search results are already tainted. Try searching for the same item on two different and well used computers. The results from Google will be different for both. Why? Simply because Google already filters your query based on past searches and visited sites.

That's optimization. It's attempting to optimize my results to give me better results.
That's completely different than pushing someone to the top of the results because
they paid them money even if it makes my results worse.

Re:Extortion

[WCMI92]

Actually, I'm doing them a favour by blocking ads, since I'm unlikely to buy their stuff anyway.

Since I don't load their ad to begin with, I'm saving their bandwidth and saving them a page view (do they pay per page view anymore or is it now only per click?)

Re:Extortion

[gnupun]

I'm not conducting a transaction with those companies, I'm viewing your publicly available website which makes no effort to keep me out.

Agreed, ads should come from the site itself, not the server of some nosy ad company. This problem is probably fixable by having a firefox addon that prevents content/scripts from extraneous sites from loading. But firefox takes tens of millions of $$$ from advertising companies (Yahoo, Google), so that's unlikely to happen anytime soon. Also, blame the designers of HTTP and HTML for allowing this.

Don't want me to block your ads, make your site subscription based and block me out entirely.

LOL, that's like saying you're entitled to mug someone unless they have a gun or a bodyguard. Their site is ad-based because that's the only way they can make money -- don't tell them how to run their business.

But don't act like I'm somehow ripping you off. Since their privacy policy is crap, we're just enacting our own.

You are ripping them off -- they get 0 benefit from you using their commercial service. That's theft.

Scorecard research, doubleclick, quantserve, and literally HUNDREDS of other companies ... their product is information about me. But I never signed up for that.

100% agree with you on this. This is blatant spying and tracking breaking many laws in the constitution. It's the govt's job to shut these people down and hopefully, they will, in the future.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

The Internet was the END of any corporate/politically biased media organization's ability to CONTROL what news is disseminated and what is hidden FOREVER.

As recent events have shown, this is false. It certainly gave the truth a better chance, but not a sure one. Brad Wardell is a good example of how one website, motivated either by clicks or a political agenda, can push a lie that gets swallowed all too readily. Fortunately, the truth eventually came out.

Re:Extortion

[JohnFen]

ads should come from the site itself, not the server of some nosy ad company.

As long as the ads aren't doing any tracking, I agree. I am much less bothered by ads that are being hosted on the same website I am viewing than ones coming from third parties.

that's like saying you're entitled to mug someone unless they have a gun or a bodyguard.

No, it's not, blocking ads isn't even on the same planet as mugging people.

You are ripping them off -- they get 0 benefit from you using their commercial service. That's theft.

I strongly disagree. I am under no obligation, legally or ethically, to accept all the data that a website sends my way. I am stealing from no one by blocking ads, any more than I am stealing from television broadcasters because I go to the bathroom during commercials.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

That's theft.

By reading this post you owe me 1 bitcoin. 1HB5XMLmzFVj8ALj6mfBsbifRoD4miY36v

Just because my business model is unenforceable in practice doesn't make it OK for you to steal from me.

Re:Extortion

[Lord Crc]

You are ripping them off -- they get 0 benefit from you using their commercial service. That's theft.

That's just silly. There is absolutely nothing in the specs that require you to present all the elements in a web page.

Ads are the most dangerous thing on the internet these days. Last year the ad network of a fairly big Norwegian magazine got hacked and for several hours visitors got exposed to a drive-by-download specifically targeting the largest bank in Norway.

Users just had to have a slightly outdated Java version installed and enabled. No interaction by the user required besides simply visiting the site. And it just so happens the very same bank requires Java for it's login procedure...

As such I see ad blocking as my #1 anti-virus/malware tool.

There are a few sites I frequented which detect my ad blocker and prevents me from reading more than the blurb and I respect that. When I forget and try to access the article and get the "please pay or turn off ad blocker" page instead, I simply close the page and move on.

Re:Extortion

[gstoddart]

LOL, that's like saying you're entitled to mug someone unless they have a gun or a bodyguard. Their site is ad-based because that's the only way they can make money -- don't tell them how to run their business.

I'm not telling them how to run their business ... I'm saying their business isn't my problem, and charity doesn't mean I'm willing to put up with the shady players who serve the ads.

Because those players I deem to be so utterly untrustworthy that if you depend on them for your revenue, you might as well sign up with organized crime.

You are ripping them off -- they get 0 benefit from you using their commercial service. That's theft.

Theft would imply I'm depriving them of something -- I'm not.

That argument is as asinine as the cable companies claiming I'm "stealing" by fast forwarding commercials ... sorry, wasn't going to buy those maxipads, don't give a crap .. and since every market got a different set of commercials, Crazy Bob's House of Used Poo doesn't have any meaningful copyright or skin in the game ... paying the cable company to air your ads doesn't make me beholden to you.

Similarly, doubleclick and all the othe shady players paying you for the privilege to put shit in my web browser doesn't place any obligation to me.

If these companies, with their FREE and PUBLICLY available websites think that somehow that means I should view and click all of their ads .. they're sorely mistaken.

Don't make it free and publicly available. And don't act like I owe you something.

Yup, I'm leaching your content that you're freely giving away, and I'm not clicking on your ads. In the same way when I fast forward through commercials ... I genuinely don't give a crap.

Their contract with me extends as far as an HTTP GET, which either works or it doesn't. And that's about as far as it goes.

Re:Extortion

[jordanjay29]

Which one can get around by signing out of Google, using an incognito/private browsing window, or using a service like TOR.

Re:Extortion

[praxis]

Fact of the matter is, there aren't any "professional" journalists anymore that do their jobs so well they deserve to be paid to read their crap

You are wrong. There are a number of journalists who are worth paying to read what they write. There are far fewer of them today than there were ten years ago, but that's because many of them did not offer much beyond what became available from other sources.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

If I ask a server for the content of a specific URL and the server returns it then that's a completely legitimate transaction. Just because the content returned contains suggestions that I also request content from URLs that I don't want doesn't put any obligation upon me to do so. You are just flat out wrong about your theft of service argument.

Adblocking is trivial to circumvent if it is that important to your business. The ad content has to be part of your site content. Turns out sites are too lazy to do it. How that's anyone else's problem is beyond me.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't pay bills with BELIEFS.

Re:Extortion

[msobkow]

LOL, that's like saying you're entitled to mug someone unless they have a gun or a bodyguard. Their site is ad-based because that's the only way they can make money -- don't tell them how to run their business.

Then they don't have a "business" -- they're just click-bait leeches.

The sites I visit are mostly presenting the documentation for products, and serving up that information is an expense of doing business, not a revenue generator.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Also, ABP is also a protection racket. Not the same as an extortion, but the two are very closely related and there is some overlap. The key difference in this case is that since whitelisting takes precedence over the blacklist, your ad will be shown even if somebody else tries to block them. Therefore, you are protecting them from someone else trying to interfere with them.

In fact, the only thing that protects them from being super screwed for racketeering is that the list is selectable as to whether a user runs it or not.

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that simple. You may have no god-given 'right' to that business, for example. Interfering is not wrong then. Nobody has any god-given right to have their ads "seen" - on the net or elsewhere. So blocking (with paying for opt-out) is not extortion.

 

Re:Extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

Criminal justifce student here. If you can prove that ABP demanded money i.e. "Give me money or else..." Then you may have a case. However, if there is no threat made or money demanded, you can't prove anything really. Just a business transaction.

Re:Extortion

[JohnFen]

That's optimization. It's attempting to optimize my results to give me better results.
That's completely different than pushing someone to the top of the results because
they paid them money even if it makes my results worse.

True, it is a different thing, but it has a similar effect: it degrades the quality of the search results. This is perhaps the single worst aspect of Google Search.

Re:Extortion

[Wycliffe]

True, it is a different thing, but it has a similar effect: it degrades the quality of the search results. This is perhaps the single worst aspect of Google Search.

How do you figure? That's not their goal at all. Their goal is to improve the quality of the search
results. Now whether they are succeeding at this is up for debate but I don't see how it
degrades it. The idea is to customize the results to the person doing the search. For instance
when a video gamer searches for infinity they are probably looking for something completely
different than when a mathmatician searches for infinity as is someone who is car shopping.
Done correctly, it should help them get better results just as humans use context to better
understand conversions.

Re:Extortion

[JohnFen]

How do you figure? That's not their goal at all. Their goal is to improve the quality of the search results. Now whether they are succeeding at this is up for debate but I don't see how it
degrades it.

I understand that's their goal. I'm just saying that my experience with it is that it accomplishes the opposite of their goal, that search results that they have "optimized" are less likely to fit what I'm looking for than ones that they leave alone. It degrades search because it makes it more difficult to find what I'm looking for.

Done correctly, it should help them get better results just as humans use context to better
understand conversions.

Then they don't do it correctly -- probably because they maintain that context across multiple search sessions. The "context" my searches take place in is not the same every time I'm searching for something. Also, I can't help but wonder if Google is misled when I click on result links. It seems that Google thinks that because I clicked on a result link, that result was relevant to my search -- but it's often not. You can't always tell if a result was correctly until you click through.

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Some alternatives...

[snkhere]

Basic blocking: https://github.com/gorhill/uBl...
More extensive blocking: https://github.com/gorhill/uMa...

Extensions are available for Chrome/Chromium. It seems Firefox is (getting) supported as well.

Re:Some alternatives...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or you just block third-party content by default. The few sites that you always want to be permitted as third-party content (e.g. gstatic.com, if you trust Google) can easily be whitelisted for all sites at the same time.

https://requestpolicycontinued.github.io/

Adblock has never failed me.

[Zeio]

I've been using it for years - from very early states - and I know within seconds if adblock is not installed on chrome, firefox and opera and android via adaway.

If adblock leaks an ad, we get the ad and block it manually, and also there are lists that are not directly under adblock plus , adblock chrome's control. The lists are pulled from and maintained separately than the blockers so Im not sure how this can go on for very long. It would be glaringly obvious over time if ads get through and the lists will be updated.

If any one of the adblockers "betrays" the community with exceptions in the code, we have plenty of places to defect to.

Re:Adblock has never failed me.

[WCMI92]

I've been using it for years - from very early states - and I know within seconds if adblock is not installed on chrome, firefox and opera and android via adaway.

As an IT professional I see user PC's all the time that don't have adblockers. I don't see how ANYONE can use the internet AT ALL without one! You barely have INFLUENCE over your browser, much less CONTROL with all the crap popping up, taking over the screen, following your mouse pointer, etc...

Re:Adblock has never failed me.

[meta-monkey]

I installed ABP and Ghostery on my grandfather's browser and left the little ghostery notification up so every time he browsed a site he'd see all the trackers. He was stunned. You go to cnn.com and there are 16 trackers. I hid the notification window later because it's annoying, but if you're not aware of this stuff, it's rather eye-opening. Browsing without a half-dozen blocking add-ons is like walking through the mall naked.

I run:

Adblock Plus
Ghostery
NoScript
BetterPrivacy (deletes Flash 'Locally Shared Objects,' which are Flash cookies a regular cookie-blocker/deleter won't notice)
Certificate Patrol
HTTPS-Everywhere
Flashblock
Smart Referer

And my default search engine is Startpage.

Any other recommendations you've got, IT Pro?

Re:Adblock has never failed me.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you use Ghostery, make sure 'Ghostrank' is not enabled, because it sends data back to Ghostery which is run and owned by advertiser 'Evidon'.

Instead of BetterPrivacy, I use TrackerBlock which deletes flash objects on browser exit, as well as blocks cookies from major advertisers, and also lists and allows you to delete HTML5 storage - which is also increasingly being used as an alternative to cookie tracking.
Although sadly in recent times, TrackerBlock has been bought-out by another evil entity, although I believe it still functions like the old versions did.

Also, DuckDuckGo is better in every single way as compared to startpage/ixquick, especially since it contains quick answers and snippets of info, along with numerous widgets... and of course, it's privacy based so they also don't track - http://donttrack.us/

Re:Adblock has never failed me.

[Nikademus]

Any other recommendations you've got, IT Pro?

Self-destructing cookies.

Re:Adblock has never failed me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Add NoRedirect and RequestPolicy to that list, and you'd have my list.

Re:Adblock has never failed me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah, pull the plug on your internet.

So what is the news here?

[houghi]

Adblock block ads.
Adblock whitelists ads when companies pay. (and that is known)
Some companies took them up on the offer and payed Adblock so they were whitelisted.

So what makes this newsworthy again?

Re:So what is the news here?

[ColdWetDog]

So what makes this newsworthy again?

It's Tuesday.

Default settings

[Himmy32]

They are upfront about this and right when you install it they give you the link to uncheck to block unobtrusive advertising. The fact that people pay to be on the "unobtrusive" list isn't exactly surprising. Nonstory.

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues

(Vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)

... apk

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Okay? So what?`

[Chas]

So long as the above companies are complying with the acceptable ad policy, meant to keep ads from being obtrusive, does it really matter?

I know some people are like "No ads, no compromise". If that's the case, get Greasemonkey and go to town.

But, on a more realistic note, this company is putting out this product for free to end-users.

Ask yourselves these questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Ask yourselves these questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Your host file junk pretty much blocked me access to the internet, had to go in safe mode to get rid of it, so screw you.

Re:Ask yourselves these questions

[Anonymous Coward]

B.S. I use hosts generated by apk's program. They do all apk says for more speed, security, and reliability, better than almost all ads blocked by miles yet hosts use less resources. Beat that with a stick.

Ask yourselves these questions

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's failed you for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

god damn it apk.
enough with the spam already

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

And that's why I haven't used adblock plus ever. There's no such thing as acceptable ads. Adblock Edge all the way

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

a layered approach is always best.

[nimbius]

Things like this bring to light a few issues that need addressing. if this action by ABP is in fact happening, a fork of the project should most certainly be considered as this 'whitelisting' violates an expected feature or function of the application by its community of users (and possibly developers.) Second, a layered approach that views advertisements/spam as part of an overarching security issue, not just nuisance patrol, should be adopted. Adblock, noscript, and null routes for known advertising servers should all be applied

its controversial to say it on slashdot (full disclosure, I consider myself a socialist) but i think advertising on the internet has gone from unintrusive to a bombastic affront to basic privacy and functional user experience. applications like ad blockers actually help to un-break the web of automatic videos barking product placement and resource sucking overly high definition adverts. ABP gives users a tool to fight back against what for many is a roary-boomy experience that requires a new laptop every year to keep up.

Re:a layered approach is always best.

[c]

if this action by ABP is in fact happening, a fork of the project should most certainly be considered as this 'whitelisting' violates an expected feature or function of the application by its community of users (and possibly developers.)

It's actually pretty old news.

That being said, I don't recall ever seeing one of those acceptable ads due to the other measures I use like noscript/scriptsafe, so I can't really comment on how acceptable they are.

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues

(Vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)

... apk

Adblock = inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Cederic]

Your abusive spam based advertising for an anti-advertising service tells me that I can't trust your service and it would be fucking insane to let it anywhere near my computer.

Will you please shut the fuck up and get off slashdot?

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh how I wish I had some mod points for you.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

You're cries of "spam" are an inferior competitor or advertiser afraid of hosts? Yes. Facts apk put out are unassailable and you know it, hence your b.s. now.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod points? How about a miracle instead? His bs can't prove apk wrong http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... and we all know it. You blew all your modpoints on apk's posts but we see them anyway. You fail at that and proving apk wrong.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

No, as a regular user that doesn't like to see SPAM or ADS. You sir are spamming, something even more detestable then banner ads.

If you can come up with a hosts file entry that blocks all the Advertisements for your malware, then maybe you could prove that your product works.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be a complete idiot. He doesn't mention anything about adblock vs hosts file. He doesn't care if you are wrong or right. What all of us care about about is that you are spamming the same crap over and over, and its even more annoying then seeing advertisements on webpages.

You have become exactly what you are trying to block, annoying crap. You are nothing but annoying crap now.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope someone shoots your faggot ass in the back.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Cederic's a complete coward who ran from a fair challenge http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... downmodding it a few times also rather than facing up to that challenge. You trolls are all idiots and weak.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

You have become exactly what you are trying to block, annoying crap.

This. Who in their right mind would ever use an ad-blocking solution from an ad spammer.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Why hello there, Panisz!

I heard that in order to drum up funds for your domain name, you raped seven toddlers and sold the VHS tapes on Silk Road, any truth to that? The part where you sold them to Silk Road I mean, you've obviously been raping toddlers as a hobby for several years. Not much work available for a pedophile like you, I'm guessing.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello again, Panisz.

So, I heard that the inspiration you had for creating start64.com was that your dad fucked you in the eye socket and the jizz filled up your skull. Good for you, overcoming adversity to be a complete fucking idiot and a pedophile.

Suppose you can't expect much better from a fucking Hungarian.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Cederic your weak crap proves apk right even more here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... where you keep running from a fair challenge he's given you.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear you're still running from proving apk wrong here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:AdBlock's INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Andrew Peter Kowalsky, the greatest manual name resolution troll ever seen on the Internet.

Re:AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Cederic's completely off topic and can't prove apk wrong either.

WARNING: Adblock Plus EasyPrivacy has a whitelist

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI: I discovered last week that Adblock Plus EasyPrivacy list whitelists a ton of 3rd party tracking scripts.

WHAT!?! You had one job, Adblock. One job.

Switch to uBlock, it's better

[Petronius]

Faster, better, hackable and free. https://github.com/gorhill/uBl...

Re:Switch to uBlock, it's better

[Anonymous Coward]

Quit spamming your fucking ad blocker ads. Fuck off.

Re:Switch to uBlock, it's better

[Anonymous Coward]

... The 'CRY OF THE DEFEATED ADVERTISER IS "YOU'RE SPAMMING"' meaning "you got the best of me and I downmod your posts" and put the "you're spamming" puny easily seen thru 'spin' on it, failing as always - big deal, you don't hide anything as everyone here browses well below 0 default easily sockpuppetry cheated so-called 'moderation system' here and we all see it anyhow even if you try to 'hide it' with downmods hiding your defeats. (Big deal also since some here are smart and can post again as much as they like on /., which you advertisrs hate since you marketers use sockpuppets like crazy online, way uncool that, and being able to repost in seconds unlimitedly as an ac dusts your "weapons of whimps" modpoints for you, and your army of you, in sockpuppets - you've not only been pwned, you've been nullified)

Don't use an Adblocker that accepts bribes

[WCMI92]

I use Adblock Edge. Used to use Adblock Plus before they started accepting bribes to cripple their own filters.

I use ad blockers because I DO NOT WANT TO SEE ADS. Period. I hate ads. To me there is NO SUCH THING as an acceptable ad.

Re:Don't use an Adblocker that accepts bribes

[mattpalmer1086]

I still use Adblock Plus. I actually don't mind seeing non-intrusive ads, and so far it seems to be working OK.

Just out of interest, what is the problem with just unticking the "allow some non-intrusive advertising" check box? Does Adblock Edge offer some additional features too? Or do you have some reason to suspect that Adblock Plus wouldn't honour your config?

Re:Don't use an Adblocker that accepts bribes

[Anonymous Coward]

there is NO SUCH THING as an acceptable ad.

I agree, but that's no reason to use a poorly maintained fork. All you have to do is remove the checkmark in Adblock Plus. It's just an extra whitelist. Completely open source and transparent, except that it should be opt-in.

If you find it immoral to "use an Adblocker that accepts bribes", then you shouldn't use Edge either because all the adblocking code in Edge comes from Plus.

AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's FAILED you for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Class Avction Suit - Where's the FTC?

[BrendaEM]

This would be a case where the Federal Trade Commission should have stepped in.

Until then, I hope people ask for their money back, before they sue.

AdBlock's inferior crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Extortion

[cgfsd]

Correct me if I am wrong, but if someone creates a product that interferes with someone else’s business and then charges them a fee to stop interfering, isn’t that extortion?

Net Neutrality?

[opusbuddy]

So Google wants a free and open internet, and doesn't want to pay for fast lanes for their data, but has no problem with same kind of payola for their advertising.

Heckuva business model.

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Can they make me control the ads I see?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

I hate intrusive ads as much as anyone. But the reality is, if the sites don't make money, they won't exist. We need to find a way to let them find ad revenue without being obnoxious. And tolerance level and definitions of obnoxiousness varies. So if we let the user control what ads and what kind of ads are allowed, and if the web sites make good faith attempt to respect the wishes of the user, they might both benefit. I have become eligible to block ads from slashdot ages ago, but I have not blocked it. I would not begrudge slashdot the small revenue stream my eyeballs provide. Same way with other sites I like. There are some Indian news paper sites with atrocious and obnoxious ad pitching. Horribly broken asp based websites that render badly. I tolerate them because if I use adblock on them, they would lose what little incentive they have to maintain their internet presence. So I am not opposed to ads at all. All I want is, an ability to control it, and the ability to let the advertisers know, what I am willing to tolerate.

I would not mind my browser sending out some kind of headers to specify my ad acceptance policy and even a few key words of goods and services I am interested in. But *I* should be the one who controls it. And the controls should be fine grained.

Something like:

(browser-ad-acceptance-policy) animation=no; flash=no; sounds=no; ad_to_payload_ratio looking_for=camcorder,auto_insurance,galapagos_island_tour;

(/browser-ad-acceptance-policy )

The add on or extension should enforce the policy on browser end when it can, without expecting good faith compliance from the web sites.

Re:Can they make me control the ads I see?

[Imagix]

It is not my responsibility to "find a way to let them find ad revenue without being obnoxious". That's their responsibility. As a whole, they have lost the trust of a fair portion of the internet's users. Thus they now pay the price that people are not willing to see _any_ of their dreck. Add to that the infection vector that they have become, as well as the source of delays in loading sites. They've got a long road ahead to build trust such that the first reaction of people isn't "block it".

Re:Can they make me control the ads I see?

[JohnFen]

But the reality is, if the sites don't make money, they won't exist.

Some won't, sure. But many will. I remember the web before the infestation of ads. It was better.

We need to find a way to let them find ad revenue without being obnoxious.

Why? Why not help them to find ways of generating revenue without advertising at all?

So if we let the user control what ads and what kind of ads are allowed, and if the web sites make good faith attempt to respect the wishes of the user, they might both benefit.

Only if ads stop all tracking. Personally, any ad that includes any sort of tracking is an objectionable ad.

Re:Can they make me control the ads I see?

[Anonymous Coward]

But the reality is, if the sites don't make money, they won't exist.

So what? There's no particular reason they should continue to exist. If they go broke, they go broke. This is the web, not television. I'll make use of the web my way and, for me, that means no ads.

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues

(Vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)

... apk

Hosts = Superior to AdBlock

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Hosts do that job & MUCH more too

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Hosts do that job & MUCH more too

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, dude? You've already been modded -1 for posting this same spam elsewhere in the thread. Give it up already.

Adblock's INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR CRAP vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Blackmail

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't this somehow similar to blackmail ? "Pay us, otherwise we block you".

AdBlock's INFERIOR CRAP vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

But they didn't restrict the user.

[Anonymous Coward]

Did they restrict the ability to filter any element on the page?
Did they restrict the user from making a free choice regarding which ad filtering list to choose?
Did they restrict the user from making his own ad filtering list?

Got Too Popular, Became a Whore Inc.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whooooooooores! The new company name should be AdBlock Plus Whoever Paid Us Not To.

AdBlock's FAILED YOU for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

The ads are entirely optional (also, div blocking)

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a setting in the main options screen that says "Allow non-intrusive advertising." It is checked by default. These advertisements that whitelisted are only whitelisted when this option is turned on. If you uncheck it, you see no adverts.

Now, there are some obscure adverts that aren't tracked or blocked by the default EasyList, but there are plugins for adblock that let you block divs by name by clicking on them, which is IMO way more useful than the default functionality. Often, all advertisements (regardless of source) will be displayed in div called something like "main-screen-left-nav-banner" or something similar. You block that div (plus suitable wildcards if necessary) on that site and you never see that portion of the page on that site again... Which means you never see whatever is in that div. This is exceptionally cool because it doesn't just block adverts but also clickbait and other ways to get you to keep looking at pages on that site.

And this approach will trump nearly any whitelist because the adverts (even when whitelisted) are contained in the div. If the div gets filtered out, the child elements never load or display. In fact, if you're lucky, the unremoved content of the page may expand to fill the now empty space where the advertisements went. It's quite beautiful.

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Use Bluhell Firewall

[Bulldozer2003]

Bluhell has no options and no menus. It just blocks everything on Easylist. I stopped using Adblock a long time ago. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

Adblock Edge - The fork that hasn't sold out

[waspleg]

from when adblock plus did. Use it instead.

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues

(Vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)

... apk

Advertising Bubble?

[Moof123]

Craziness in the ad space has all the feel of being a ginormous bubble. Companies who have a business model of selling banner ads via an app and have no other revenue sources seem especially precarious to the perception of advertising effectiveness. If at some point studies come out showing banner ads are as ineffective as I think they are (I think they are a net negative to most companies who use them) the rug could get pulled out from the whole mess.

People are getting trained to filter this stuff out left and right. I find myself avoiding google when I look for certain things because I know that if they are common I will have to wade through a page or more of paid up links that are mostly only tangentially related to what I am looking for. I can't recall the contents of any recent banner ads, and there are a number of sites I just don't visit on my ipad because they are so awful without AdBlock running.

How about a new Kickstarter campaign where we pool our money to buy up highway billboard space and put up pretty murals instead of ads?

Hosts file

[Anonymous Coward]

I use this plus Adblock.

I have a 1.5/.25Mbps DSL. Ads really hurt my internet experience and they never advertise anything of value, either. Complete waste of bandwidth.

I'd get faster, but ATT and Comcast have already drilled my ass enough.

When the asshole ISPs here in the States start offering Industrialized World quality service instead of this Third World shit, then I'll consider getting better service.

And don't get me started on their "packages", "deals" and other skanky business shit they pull.

The OP is not a troll

[waspleg]

this is the truth. Anyone who was using adblock plus before the sell out knows this and uses the fork, Adblock Edge, instead.

Re:The OP is not a troll

[WCMI92]

Obviously people who work for Adblock Plus have mod points.

Adblock Edge is the best version of Adblock (remember Adblock Plus itself is a fork of the original Adblock and isn't an original work either) that I've used on Firefox, and I use it and Firefox both on Windows and Mac.

Hosts = way BETTER alternative

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock = INFERIOR + 'Souled-Out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Warning: MALWARE LINKING TROLL

[Anonymous Coward]

Cease your criminal activity!!!

Do it yourself with the aid of a firewall

[pigsycyberbully]

Why not just block the ads with your firewall. Whoops! maybe some people need to allow ads sometimes? for some reason. If it's a software firewall on a Windows system can they not just block the ads with OutPostPro firewall. would not using AdBlock plus slow down your browser?

Sigh

[ledow]

"said it did not wish to comment"

Thus, I infer that you did indeed sell out, because why else wouldn't you comment if the accusation was wrong.

Additionally, people use ad-block software so that they don't have to see ads. To then take money to make those people see ads is the antithesis of your existence.

Good luck clawing your customer base back.

I wouldn't touch you from this point onwards (and to be honest, how did people not notice it wasn't blocking those ads?). But, hey, I'm an Opera user moving to Vivaldi soon as Opera sold-out in a similar fashion and got rid of all their interesting features (including built-in adblock before AdBlock even existed).

AdBlock's inferior vs. hosts @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:AdBlock's inferior vs. hosts @ ALL levels

[dave420]

Can hosts files block inline content? No.

I await your usual torrent of abuse from you and your many sock-puppets, joking between yourselves. Is that what the inside of your head is like?

Re:AdBlock's inferior vs. hosts @ all levels

[dave420]

So you create a hosts-file-based ad blocking system, then proceed to shower Slashdot with adverts it can not block, but your competitors can, and don't see the joke?

Re:AdBlock's inferior vs. hosts @ ALL levels

[BarbaraHudson]

If they did we'd certainly use them to block his crap-floods :-)

But he's SO predictable ... and it takes him SO long to wind down ... maybe we can use his spinning around to power a dynamo and solve the energy problem?

Taboola

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? That clickbait spam peddling PoS outfit - "non-intrusive"? Fuck that.

AdBlock's inferior vs. hosts @ ALL levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold out

[waspleg]

years ago. Please explain how uBlock is better.

I *NEVER* see ads (or get the malware from them) on the machines that use Adblock Edge in Firefox, how does it get better than that?

Kill 2 birds with 1 stone

[chaosdivine69]

Get rid of Firefox and use Palemoon http://www.palemoon.org/ and then install AdBlock Latitude https://addons.palemoon.org/ex... You'll wonder what all the fuss is about after you wrestle your old UI back from Firefox and have all your ads blocked by a reputable organization (Palemoon) that won't sell out to the dark side like AdBlock Plus did. These two greedy companies need more people to jump ship and make a statement. Do your part. You'll be glad you did.

Re:Kill 2 birds with 1 stone

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes Palemoon more reputable than Mozilla? The fact that you like the UI more, or the fact that they basically made a fork of Firefox that's only better if you're addicted to the older and increasingly-more-broken UI? Perhaps you should make a statement by actually helping Mozilla out, rather than pretending you're a hero for using a meager fork of their hard work? Or does Palemoon actually contribute anything back to Firefox, rather than take?

Re:Kill 2 birds with 1 stone

[TheGratefulNet]

palemoon had problems (I gave up, maybe they fixed it) with flash and/or youtube.

for some reason, they are not compatible with many plugins and this was a dealbreaker for me.

i tried it for months but had to abandon it. sadly.

Re:Kill 2 birds with 1 stone

[Anonymous Coward]

What's wrong with Firefox?
After-all, palemoon wouldn't exist without the wonderful efforts of all the people behind Firefox.

If you don't like the UI in Firefox (like I don't), then simply install 'Classic Theme Restorer' addon, which allows much greater customisation than Palemoon.

AdBlock's INFERIOR to hosts @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR vs. hosts @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

I guess this explains those trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose this explains why everywhere you go, you see trolls claiming that adblock is the only choice for rational internet-surfers who see no downside to the fact that this simply encourages higher numbers of more subversive ads to circulate.

This isn't privacy, this is extortion

[davydagger]

This is extortion at its finest. This reminds me of politics, where companies threaten to regulate industries to shake them down for donations, and then back off. Or thinktanks do the same Its agains christianity/islam/women/blacks/gays to do X, so donate and we'll tell you how to deal with this, while changing nothing.

fortunately its GPL, so put a fork in it, and be done.

Re:This isn't privacy, this is extortion

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not extortion to pay an organization to vet your operations based upon some stated criteria. It's not like adblock plus is some kind of mandatory browser extension. People who use it may just appreciate the company doing that work for them. Other people will use other extensions or none at all.

This is literally no different then paying a CA for an SSL certificate that some people will then take more seriously than a self signed certificate.

Calm down dude.

0.17%

[Anonymous Coward]

0.17% is the click thru for pop up ads. And it is not much different than the click thru for normal banner (a bit less than 0.1%)... Are you telling is this is a success ? FYI Video ad have a click thru rate of 4%. About 40 times more.

Re:0.17%

[Grishnakh]

0.17% is the click thru for pop up ads. And it is not much different than the click thru for normal banner (a bit less than 0.1%)... Are you telling is this is a success ?

Yes, it is. Pop-up ads don't cost nearly as much money to "air" as video ads; the cost-per-viewing is ridiculously low. It only takes a few morons clicking on them to make them profitable.

Ask yourself: why did advertisers use them for so long (until the browsers finally made blocking standard)? Companies generally only do things if they're profitable. No one is going to continue to pour money into something for years on end that's costing them money and not making a return on the investment.

Re:0.17%

[Anonymous Coward]

0.17% is the click thru for pop up ads. And it is not much different than the click thru for normal banner (a bit less than 0.1%)... Are you telling is this is a success ?

Yes, it is. Pop-up ads don't cost nearly as much money to "air" as video ads; the cost-per-viewing is ridiculously low. It only takes a few morons clicking on them to make them profitable.

Ask yourself: why did advertisers use them for so long (until the browsers finally made blocking standard)? Companies generally only do things if they're profitable. No one is going to continue to pour money into something for years on end that's costing them money and not making a return on the investment.

Sigh.

Haven't been out of the basement very much eh?

Here's how this works, first, users don't intentionally click on those ads, they have DECIDED to click on something else and are executing that click when the ad pops under where they were clicking. Or similar mistakes of the mouse. I bet if you took any given 1x1 inch section of screen you'd get MUCH HIGHER accidental clicks on it than you do on a pop-up ad over time.

Second, Ad purveyors, SEO scam artists, and all the other human garbage types that sell those things LIE to small businesses and say "Hey, we can make lots of clicks to your site!" and the poor sap running the frosted-widget business spends a couple hundred on some scam because he doesn't know any better.

Ask yourself, how come your worldview doesn't include these two scenarios? You realize people buy dousing rods, horoscope readings, and all other sorts of shit too right? Only a fucking retard would say the money spent is because those actually things work. It's spent due to ignorance and susceptibility to scammers.

Re:0.17%

[Grishnakh]

Only a fucking retard would on one hand point out (rightfully) that people are stupid enough to buy dousing rods and horoscope reading, but then try to claim that all computer users are smart enough to never (intentionally) click on a pop-up ad and then buy whatever crap they're selling.

It's the same reason spam exists. The costs are tiny (per customer-view), and it only takes a few morons to buy it to make it profitable. Yes, some of this is scammy ad-men inflating the effectiveness of ads to their customers, but it wouldn't have gone on this long if zero people actually bought anything; the customers would have gone out of business from not having any sales.

A better question you ran from

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts & more efficiently? NO -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

YOU FAIL!

APK

P.S.=> As always, you fail, lol (so does "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" vs. hosts, bigtime)... apk

Re:A better question you ran from

[Coren22]

Can hosts block DNS amplification attacks? NO.

http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

Can Adblock do all hosts can? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

I'm OK with ads... but I still use AdBlock

[penguinoid]

I don't inherently have a problem with ads, not even with ads tailored to my personal preferences (which I would actually prefer over random ads). I'd even be willing to check a few boxes to mark my interests.

However, that's just not good enough for the marketing companies. They want flashy ads that distract from the page I'm reading, they want to track my every move, they want to sell my data, they want to run scripts on my computer, they want popups, popunders, redirects, accidental clicks, they would cheerfully ruin the user experience if it would get them one more click. And they don't want to check whether the ads their showing are links to scams, frauds, malware, or even if the ads themselves contain malware. They'll cheerfully commit outright fraud while pretending to be advertisers (eg "virus detected on your computer" style ads). And some websites have changed their design to have a little bit of text with mountains of ads, sometimes with a load-the-ads-first system, sometimes splitting a page's worth of content into 10 pages to show more ads, and generally treating advertizing companies as their customer and users as their product.

And so for my sanity I have to use AdBlock.

Re:I'm OK with ads... but I still use AdBlock

[swillden]

I'd even be willing to check a few boxes to mark my interests.

FYI, boxes to check: https://www.google.com/setting...

Why'd you avoid my questions dave420?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts do & more efficiently? NO http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

YOU FAIL, "Forrest" - keep "running"... lol - YOU & "your kind" attempting to effetely "hide" my posts with unjustifiable downmods that can't prove my points on hosts' abilities + efficiencies SUPERIORITY to "almost all ads blocked" are failing too... truth is all I need, & I provided it, documented by reputable sources.

APK

P.S.=> I'm not "advertising" a damn thing - my program's FREE & comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED by the best in the anti-malware/spyware/virus industry (MalwareBytes) + is also hosted by them as well - which is, of course, MORE than a "ne'er-do-well" that runs from straight questions (see link above) like you have, "forrest"... apk

What's all that spam?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't the editors do anything about that imbecile who is posting all that spam?

Re:What's all that spam?

[Anonymous Coward]

We are developing a new product: APKBlock

AdBlock's inferior to hosts @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

You failed & ran (lol) "Forrest"

[Anonymous Coward]

Downmods != proving me wrong & neither does running from this http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... since it's obvious by this time you can't prove me wrong on hosts being far superior on all levels to "almost ALL Ads Blocked".

* :)

(All your "cries" of "spam" = REALLY you're blatant admission of DEFEAT - pure SELF-defeat, & you know it, I KNOW IT, + so does *anyone* else reading... lol!)

You've obviously "run dry" of your modpoints & those of your sockpuppets too, lmao... & THAT b.s. of yours is "the best you got" vs. my solid factual documented by reputable sources points?

APK

P.S.=> Thanks for making ME look GOOD, & yourself? Well, lol... "not so good", doing a "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" from my points on hosts superiority to adblock (with you unable to disprove even a SINGLE point I made on that note)... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Ok Cederic: A fair challenge... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Ok Cederic: A fair challenge... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

You know Cederic's going to "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" from it or downmod it to hide it.

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Addendum: True story, AdBlock vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues

(Vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR vs. hosts @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Business as usual

[Archtech]

This sounds completely consistent with 21st century business practices. Offer a service to do X, then accept money not to do X = without telling the people who are relying on it.

Suckers!

A better question you RAN from "Forrest"

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts & more efficiently? NO -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

YOU FAIL (especially seeing you UNJUSTIFIABLY downmod this post last time I posted it http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... since you're CLEARLY UNABLE TO PROVE MY POINTS WRONG VALIDLY & TECHNICALLY on the superiority of hosts vs. ANY single other "so-called 'solution' - especially "Almost ALL Ads Blocked", lol)

Downmods don't cut it - We see my points anyhow (for most of us browsing below the level of 0 which you are *trying* vainly to "hide" my posts with your bogus downmods - I'll run you DRY of them, & then what'll you have? EGG ON YOUR FACE, & running, & that's about it!)

APK

P.S.=> As always, you fail, lol (so does "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" vs. hosts, bigtime)... apk

Unblock and watch your CPU go to max burn

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, so I'm visiting a free site that provides resources to die for (Nexusmods), and I notice a strange pix with an unhappy emoticon on it. Always wondered how the site paid for itself, and looking more closely, saw it was a 'begging' message asking visitors to switch off adblock on this site. Well I love these people, so how could I say "no".

Click-click and adblock is off. Ads are two discrete active rectangles of modest size- great- although I do not like the nasty dishonest British companies that are promoting their wares- but so be it.

Scroll down the page. STUTTER, STUTTER, STUTTER. Hmmm... Ctrl-Alt-Del and there's the task manager. I almost fall off my chair. Memory and CPU are being burned AT MAX. Well, there a a million UNACTIVE tabs on my browser, so maybe it is something else. But I switch of the ads again, check the resource monitor, and watch as CPU and memory use return to normal.

F**k the online ad companies, and the sites that use them without demanding responsible behaviour. Those ads on Nexusmods are already the type that illegally track you from site to site (I've had experience with them before). And that they are coded so maliciously, they think my computer resources are theirs is the last straw!

And here's the thing. It is TRIVIAL to develop back-end server systems that incorporate SIMPLE ads as part of the 'editorial' content of a website, so they cannot be automatically blocked. If these sites hate adblock they answer is in their own hands- make the ads a TRUE part of their own site content- yeah that might require a bit of effort, but newspapers had to learn how to do this from the very beginning.

Online advertising is MALICIOUS and LAZY. And ads that max burn your CPU should be ILLEGAL- think how much wasted power they are responsible for across the planet. An adblock enabled browser can be safely left on most pages with the CPU idling. Without adblock, the browser is burning 5-50 watts more. And you Betas are told by your government masters that they care about 'green' issues. Where's the 'green' thinking with online ads. When did you Betas EVER hear your politician masters proclaim the need to regulate online ads- oh that's right, your masters are in the pockets of those that make the ads so it doesn't matter.

 

Re:Unblock and watch your CPU go to max burn

[mujadaddy]

It's actually your adblocker pegging your CPU, hoss.

R O T F L M A O @ Cederic (9623) "running"

[Anonymous Coward]

Why'd ya run from a fair challenge put to you Cederic? http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... downmods to try effetely "hide" it too? Please. LOL, you FAIL!

Re:I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold ou

[Anonymous Coward]

Simply clicking his link would have told you, they have comparison tests showing uBlock performing much better than Adblock Plus or its derivatives/forks.

Why'd you run from questions, Dave420?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts do & more efficiently? NO http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & downmodding it to *try* to effetely HIDE it too? LOL, thanks (now, you look stupid).

* :)

YOU FAIL, "Forrest" - keep "running"... lol - YOU & "your kind" attempting to effetely "hide" my posts with unjustifiable downmods that can't prove my points on hosts' abilities + efficiencies SUPERIORITY to "almost all ads blocked" are failing too... truth is all I need, & I provided it, documented by reputable sources.

APK

P.S.=> I'm not "advertising" a damn thing - my program's FREE & comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED by the best in the anti-malware/spyware/virus industry (MalwareBytes) + is also hosted by them as well - which is, of course, MORE than a "ne'er-do-well" that runs from straight questions (see link above) like you have, "forrest"... apk

Re:Why'd you run from questions, Dave420?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts do & more efficiently?

yes it can, get over it.

"your kind" attempting to effetely "hide" my posts with unjustifiable downmods

you're 100% spam and troll, they're perfectly justified

I provided it, documented by reputable sources.

no, you didn't, still waiting for your benchmarks by the way.

P.S.=> I'm not "advertising" a damn thing

you don't understand what "advertising" means ? go get a fucking dictionary. you posted your crap exactly the same over several dozens posts in this thread. that's called spamming. period.

my program's FREE & comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED by the best in the anti-malware/spyware/virus industry (MalwareBytes)

no, it doesn't, the "recommendation" comes from a blog post, puts your crapware in second place and says "it will do", not "it's highly recommended". Besides, it's a proven security failure as it requires root access to be of any use.

you failed to address all the points last time we had that very argument and you had to eat your words several times. why do you keep coming back with your poor grammar and horrible CAPitALIZaTIon ? well at least, you went low on the random bold, guess there's an improvement in readability after all.

Can AdBlock do all what hosts can?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Can AdBlock do all what hosts can?

[CauseBy]

You are seriously an asshat. Doesn't anyone have mod points? Let's get this jerk to -2.

Can AdBlock do all that hosts do? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Way BETTER alternative (on ALL levels)... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Ok Cederic: A fair challenge... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Adblock Edge

[Anonymous Coward]

ublock even better.

How about Slashdot honoring their own opt-out

[jtara]

Slashdot has (partially) stopped honoring their own ad opt-out. (You can opt-out of ads if you account is more than n old or something.) It still opts-out banner ads. But now they have added AdSense, and it does not block that. Since I opt-out of targeted AdSense, all I get is ads for removing dark spots. Ewwwww! Please report these ads to Google, since SlashDot is not honoring their own opt-out policy. That can't be consistent with AdSense rules. Opt-out means: "opt-out". And, of course, that goes for AdBlock as well. You are PAYING for a service that removes ads. If advertisers can pay to get around that, it is a fraud.

LMAO - Cederic did BOTH

[Anonymous Coward]

Cederic ran from my questions & downmodded them to hide them http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

APK

P.S.=> THIS is how I just KNOW that I am winning this fight - when my "naysayer opponents" RUN like scared rabbitts (just like W. Palant did when I gave HIM the same challenge & HE'S THE AUTHOR OF "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" no less)... apk

AdBlock's vastly INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's FAILED YOU for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

privoxy

[QuietLagoon]

privoxy does ad blocking and reduces tracking. A different approach.

AdBlock's INFERIOR & 'Souled-Out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR & 'Souled-Out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's vastly INFERIOR to hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold ou

[Kinwolf]

years ago. Please explain how uBlock is better.

I *NEVER* see ads (or get the malware from them) on the machines that use Adblock Edge in Firefox, how does it get better than that?

Well, he DID explain it to you, if only you'd take the time to click the provided link that is.

You seriously can't prove apk wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Technically unjustifiable downmods only made apk look good here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Hosts do that job (& far more) BETTER

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:sketchy website

[Anonymous Coward]

before you blame me for visiting a sketchy website let me say this: Google listed the website as a place to download some free software. I didn't realize that the website had cracked software. I think Warze is the term?

AdBlock's INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Malware? It's hosted by MalwareBytes

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't prove apk's points on hosts superiority to adblock wrong? http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... Yes, you can't, as it's clearly beyond your means: Truth's like that. Get used to it. You fail. MalwareBytes hosts and recommends it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk . They are the #1 antivirus/antispyware/antimalware out there http://www.av-test.org/en/news... . I think THEY know far BETTER than you do, by far, on what's "malware" or not.

They use hostnames? Hosts block them!

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Pretty simple - it's EXACTLY how I blocked CryptoLocker (the DGA names are available from good guys like Gar Warner & I get them + add them as blocked to hosts - same with adbanner servers too!).

Case closed: Hosts are FAR superior to *ANY* single "so-called 'solutions'" out there for more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity (to a lesser extent on the latter) - let's see "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" do the same!

APK

P.S.=> Hosts work for FAR MORE than "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" by far, & FAR MORE EFFICIENTLY also -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & I don't see *ANYONE* able to validly disprove those points of mine on that note... lol! apk

Re:They use hostnames? Hosts block them!

[Anonymous Coward]

So you've got aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa124.adserver.com listed in your hosts file?

Why are you wasting that space? They'll never use that hostname ever again.

What about a151j15125n1l125n125b1u521i51k1b51my8h12b5b1515y21588125.adserver.com?

They're going to use that hostname tomorrow at about 3:15PM to serve up exactly one ad.

I'm sure your hosts file is awesome and covers quite a lot of stuff that's out there right now thanks to the old school "here paste some javascript into your web page and get rich from ads" dweebs like google who can't just ditch their entire ad network, but the new guard are already coming and they've upped their game with wordpress plugins that use PHP to generate a UUID hostname for every ad served up (and that's just the beginning).

I'm giving you a tip here, man. It's your choice to take it or leave it. jfaiwam's already looking to replace his hosts file with a custom DNS server to handle wildcard domains.

Re:They use hostnames? Hosts block them!

[Anonymous Coward]

Those botnet hostnames blocked in hosts can't be a threat no matter what, apk's correct.

There is no such thing as an unobtrusive ad

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no such thing as an "unobtrusive ad."

That very term is offensive and is an oxymoron.

Re:There is no such thing as an unobtrusive ad

[Zalbik]

There is no such thing as an "unobtrusive ad."

That very term is offensive and is an oxymoron.

obtrusive (adj.): noticeable or prominent in an unwelcome or intrusive way.
advertisement (noun): a paid announcement, as of goods for sale, in newspapers or magazines, on radio or television, etc.
oxymoron (noun): a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction

You misunderstand the definition of one of the words you are using.

Re:There is no such thing as an unobtrusive ad

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think that Zalbik misunderstands at all. I think you don't understand the point because you have been conditioned to believe that advertising is "normal" communication.
It is not. It is a type of communication (like bullying) that intrudes when it is not invited, usually uses coercive means to manipulate people, and steals the attention and time we could put to better use elsewhere.

MalwareBytes hosts & recommends it

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: You FAIL, badly -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

* WoW: Idiots like YOU obviously don't think people can read - new NEWS/NewsFlash/Clue: They can & will see that fact vs. your trolling WEAK bullshit, lol...

APK

P.S.=> MalwareBytes = #1 antivirus/antispyware/antimalware out there http://www.av-test.org/en/news... . I think THEY know far BETTER than you do, by far, on what's "malware" or not... apk

Re:MalwareBytes hosts & recommends it

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow you keep saying over and over that MalwareBytes recommends your piece of crap, yet the page you are linking to is a different organization, and they didn't even evaluate your software.

You managed to get your software hosted at a site "POWERED BY" by Malwarebytes. That does not mean they recommend it at all. Show us a link were MalwareBytes themselves actually recommended your software.

Oh wait, you can't. Better RUN FOREST RUN back to your cave of spam spewing solitude.

Re: MalwareBytes hosts & recommends it

[Anonymous Coward]

Then make your own HOSTS file it's fuckin easy. Don't need a laziness engine for that.

Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[swillden]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability: [...]

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend [...]

Does anyone know of an ad-blocking plugin that will block this particularly large, obnoxious and insanely repetitive ad?

I'm seriously thinking about writing one.

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[temcat]

Better a more generic regexp-based one. But with an APK preset, that's for sure.

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[swillden]

Yeah, definitely would need to be regexp-based. Perhaps with crowdsourced updates, to quickly respond to any changes APK makes in his screed.

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone ever prove apk wrong though? No http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

You've clearly failed at proving apk wrong here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Your preset's "FAIL": You clearly fail at proving apk wrong http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahahahahahaha @ "temcat preset = FaiL" that is some funny shit!

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[temcat]

Hehe, In APK's world, one can fail at something one didn't do.

I don't care whether APK is "right" about his hosts file thing, I just know for a fact that he's a flooder/spammer, and that's what's totally wrong about him. He just makes reading Slashdot at a low comment threshold much worse for people who aren't interested in his project or product. (And for those who are - I guess, one or two posts under an on-topic article is quite enough for them, too.)

OTOH, he seems to normally use subject line, so that's probably one way to spot and avoid his spam when reading at a higher threshold.

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[swillden]

You've clearly failed at proving apk wrong here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

I didn't try to prove APK wrong. I actually have no interest in arguing with him/her/it. I just find the posts incredibly annoying. I also strongly suspect they're actually paid ads, being compensated for the bit at the end about the "best AV".

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't prove apk wrong is more like it. We see it http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[swillden]

LOL.

No, I was right the first time. I simply don't care about hosts vs Adblock or whatever. I just want to stop the crapflooding.

Re:Hosts = better on all those levels (& more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Best you've got is downmods not proving apk wrong? You fail http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... I mean, seriously: Do you *think* your off-topic cries of "spam" mean *anything* when apk's so clearly floored ALL of you Open SORES AdBlock (paid off by advertisers to NOT do its job no less) fans are winning? You're LOSING, badly. You're helping make it happen, asshole. I personally think it's hilarious watching apk nullify your 1 "wuss weapon" in the bogus downmod by seeing him make you exhaust them and those of your sockpuppets you farm karma with to get more modpoints to mod yourself up with and those like apk you can't get the better of, down with. You must think we're stupid. Guess what? We all know the game. You're losing thru your own stupidity exposed.

Run a BETTER adblocker (& far more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock's WAY INFERIOR vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Best recommendation = hosts (adblock blows)

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold ou

[Anubis IV]

how does it get better than that?

Quite a few ways, actually, all of which would have been apparent had you just clicked the link, but if you need it spelled out for you...
1) uBlock is available for multiple browsers and is available via official stores/sites for at least some of them (with plans to get into the others). Doesn't matter to you, perhaps, but it does matter to some of us, especially if we're looking for something to recommend to non-techie friends and family.

2) uBlock actually leads to a reduced memory footprint for your browser, whereas AdBlock Plus (on which Edge is based), increases the browser's memory footprint.

3) uBlock has SIGNIFICANTLY better CPU performance than ABP and its competitors. Nearly an order of magnitude.

4) uBlock is slightly better at blocking unnecessary server hits. About twice as good as ABP, and just a shade worse than Ghostery.

All of which is to say, by nearly every measurable metric, it's better than the thing that you think is the best.

Extraordinarily well known hosts = better

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Ok blackomegax: A fair challenge... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Prove me validly wrong then, troll... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Solution:

[Anonymous Coward]

Run 'links' , 'lynx' , 'links2' text mode browsers. Problem solved!

If an adsource uses hostnames?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: It's blockable in hosts (& that's only 1 thing hosts does, better than adblock, more efficiently as well - the rest for more speed, security, & reliability are here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... which you OBVIOUSLY cannot VALIDLY TECHNICALLY PROVE ME WRONG ON - period!)

Inlined ads? Served from the SAME site?? LMAO - those DO NOT PAY, as the advertisers do NOT TRUST WEBMASTERS on clickview counts... so, get real, & get back in the REAL world pal!

APK

P.S.=> The FACT you weak little weasels can't prove my points validly technically wrong, AND, that all you have is unjustifiable downmods (vs. hosts PROVEN to do more for speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity over inefficient REDUNDANT browser addons) proves my points for me...

Call it "SPAM" all you like (as that's all you've got & it's PUREST bullshit vs. facts I use from reputable sources) - everyone KNOWS that's the 'cry of the defeated inferior competitor or advertisers - especially when everyone SEES you "running" from proving me wrong, "Forrest"... apk

Adblock is bad business for all

[Ravaldy]

Blocking ads is like blocking the revenue stream for those providing free content and services. I know I'll get flak for saying this. Fact is that it's the little guys that get hurt the most by this ad blocking service.

One could say that maybe their method of advertising is not efficient (compared to in video ads on Youtube) but it's what they have right now and it's not right for a company to be able to strip out what the site intended the viewer to see.

For those who will say that it ruins the user experience I say this to you: "Find another service for free"

Using javascript makes YOU a fool

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the MAIN delivery mechanism for malware? Javascript (then Java, Flash, etc.) - you LOSE...

* You're STUPID ENOUGH to use javascript on "every site under the sun"? No wonder fools like YOU get infested constantly then!

APK

P.S.=> Amazing: Did you *think* your SINGLE "so-called 'point'" stood (complete bs - ads served inline on the SAME SERVER as a site don't pay - advertisers don't TRUST webmasters on clickview counts... get real & into the REAL world, where hosts rule vs. browser addons)...?

That b.s. (along with "almost all ads blocked" + other INFERIOR browser addons) just can't stand up to my list of BLATANT INFERIORITIES AdBlock has vs. hosts here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... since your inability to prove those points wrong proves THAT much, easily!

Thanks - you FAIL, bigtime! apk

I'm actually rooting for Adblock plus on this issu

[Rashkae]

For those complaining about Adblock plus selling out... Have you actually looked at the requirements for Ad's that adblock will allow (even paid for?). Personally, I'm in full support of Adblock Plus campaign to pressure ad companies into returning to non-intrusive and non-annoying ads. Advertising *can* be a positive thing if the money helps sponsor content on web pages *and* potentialy provides useful information to people who might benefit from learning about a product or service.

Google used to be on the forfront of promising a clean and non-annoying ad network. They built their whole search engine reputation on it. Unfortunately, they since sold out and became the biggest pedler and annoying ads currently in business. A firm hand is needed to bring the entire ad industry to heel and hold them to a standard that will control public annoyance and malware both. If Adblock Plus can achieve this, while getting paid for their own work in the process, all the power to them. I think Firefox should partner with Adblock Plus to include the plugin by default with new installs, while getting a cut of the sponsered acceptibe ads.

MalwareBytes hosting + recommending it does

[Anonymous Coward]

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (MalwareBytes #1 test result vs. ALL OTHERS here in mid 2014 -> http://www.av-test.org/en/news... )

* You've done better, bullshitter?

(Hell no, lol... & certainly NOT in coding a solution YOURSELF that does as much as MINE does, vs. all others also...)

APK

P.S.=> You're SO weak, along with all the other little pricks around here downmodding my posts on hosts superiority to "ALMOST ALL ADS BLOCKED" (paid off NOT to do so, & failing at the ONE THING it's SUPPOSED TO DO, lol, doing it terribly inefficiently & REDUNDANTLY) yet NEVER, ever, proving my points wrong on how hosts give folks more speed, security, reliability, & more (that any 1 browser addon can't do alone or at all) here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... so THANK YOU for proving my points all the more - you're FAILING... apk

Real truth's = Hosts are superior to AdBlock

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Can AdBlock do all hosts can? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Ok Cederic: A fair challenge... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Cederic the sockpuppet failed

[Anonymous Coward]

Apk he's just going to sockpuppet downmod it like he has 3 times now.

^THIS

[Burz]

The hypocrisy from the ad industry is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

You can't go home again.

[westlake]

I remember the days before advertising was big on the web, when content was provided by universities and hobbyists.

I purchased an expensive "Yellow Page" directory for the Internet back in the geek's glory days, annotating web pages, FTP sites, USENET and so on ---- and it made for pretty for dull reading even then.

There was no way the university and the hobbyist would be able to keep up with the demand for content, easier access and better presentation ignited by the launch of Windows 95, affordable PCs with integrated "high speed" modems, the free web browser, dial-up AOL at a flat monthly rate and so on.

Cederic = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!", lol... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh! Why'd bigmouth Cederic "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & downmod that (for the 3rd time now) for? We KNOW why - he's FAILED again, lmao, against a COMPLETELY FAIR challenge.

APK

P.S.=> Thanks Cederic, you bullshitting bloward: You've proven my points for me BETTER than I could (considering you can't prove a SINGLE ONE of that list of 17 wrong validly/technically)... apk

Can AdBlock do all hosts can? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Extraordinarily well known hosts = better

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

this..

[QAChaos]

when I was in my early teens playing with my ti99/4a I would never have thought that I would have to deal with BS like this( advertising on my computer , programs that block the advertisers, companies pay said programs to advertise on my computer) on my computer. That and a production on call support schedule

Re:this..

[farble1670]

really? do tell what other things about the future you failed to predict?

Re:this..

[QAChaos]

hey i'm just saying that if my ti 999/4a booted up with advertisements or came with an on call pager that would wake me up in the middle of the night when there was a production down because my basic program from compute! suddenly crashed I might have made a different career choice.

By avoiding DNS using hosts I do

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Pretty simple - put your fav. sites in hosts @ top & no DNS needed...

* YOU have FAILED, again... lol!

APK

P.S.=> Folks spend their time @ their favorite sites (I do, literally 94.5++% of my time online per my router logs + browser histories analyzed - I'm NO different than anyone else - like TV, you have favorite channels, & online, you have favorite sites) - I put 24 favorites of mine @ the top of hosts (equating to 2-3 million indexed remote DNS seeks mind you) & thus, I AVOID DNS & AMPLIFICATION ATTACKS ON THEM EASILY BY RARELY USING DNS (sub 4% of the time I do & WHEN I do? I use OpenDNS: Fully kaminsky redirect patched, filtered vs. threats, AND OpenDNS uses DNSSEC between themselves & their upstream updaters - this is BOTH in my OS IP Stack connection settings & also in my routers for DNS)... apk

Re:By avoiding DNS using hosts I do

[Coren22]

How does using hosts prevent you from the flood of traffic coming from the internet that is completely unrelated to any action you do? This is DDOS, not DNS

If you never ever in your life setup a DNS server, you can still be knocked offline by DNS amplification attacks. If you never ever in your life setup NTP, you can still get knocked offline by a NTP amplification attacks.

I linked to you very descriptive articles, and explained the mechanics. Hosts won't save you. It doesn't matter if you never make a request to DNS, DNS amplification will still take you offline.

Who will host?

[tepples]

Cloud-based distributed search engines - technically feasible with user-donated CPU time, memory and storage.

And trust?

Facebook - people can very well migrate to diaspora.

But who will host Diaspora servers to meet Facebook's volume?

Twitter - that's not really that computing-intensive, is it?

You'd be surprised. There's a lot of RAM-intensive indexing to keep Twitter showing tweets and not fail whales.

Should be pretty easily replaceable.

It's replaceable with Pump.io servers, but who will host them?

Better question you RAN from 2x Forrest

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts & more efficiently? NO -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

YOU FAIL (especially seeing you UNJUSTIFIABLY downmod this post last 2 times I posted it http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & here too http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... since you're CLEARLY UNABLE TO PROVE MY POINTS WRONG VALIDLY & TECHNICALLY on the superiority of hosts vs. ANY single other "so-called 'solution' - especially "Almost ALL Ads Blocked", lol)

Downmods don't cut it - We see my points anyhow (for most of us browsing below the level of 0 which you are *trying* vainly to "hide" my posts with your bogus downmods - I'll run you DRY of them, & then what'll you have? EGG ON YOUR FACE, & running, & that's about it!)

APK

P.S.=> As always, you fail, lol (so does "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" vs. hosts, bigtime)... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR to hosts @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Hosts = a BETTER adblocker (& far more)

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Hosts = better on ALL levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

I'll explain how hosts = better

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Hosts = superior to AdBlock @ all levels

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Bullshit (adblock can't even do ads right)

[Anonymous Coward]

Again: Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Why'd you run from questions 4x now Dave420?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts do & more efficiently? NO http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & downmodding it to *try* to effetely HIDE it & fair challenges + questions put YOUR WAY by myself, too?

LOL, thanks (now, you look stupid).

* :)

YOU FAIL, "Forrest" - keep "running"... lol - YOU & "your kind" attempting to effetely "hide" my posts with unjustifiable downmods that can't prove my points on hosts' abilities + efficiencies SUPERIORITY to "almost all ads blocked" are failing too...

(Truth is all I need, & I provided it, documented by reputable sources).

APK

P.S.=> I'm not "advertising" a damn thing - My program's FREE & comes HIGHLY RECOMMENDED by the best in the anti-malware/spyware/virus industry (MalwareBytes) + is also hosted by them as well - which is, of course, MORE than a "ne'er-do-well" that runs from straight questions (see link above) like you have, "forrest"... apk

You're a serious pussy

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't prove apk wrong hosts = better by far vs. adblock http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... and all you have is your modpoints. Keep blowing them. Apk can post without limits unlike most ac posters, so he'll run you dry of your modpoints and those of your sockpuppets too, punk. Modpoints that are misused/abused are easily seen through by users here. That's what you're up to. You'll fail that too vs. apk.

old news, instead use edge

[Anonymous Coward]

"Adblock Edge is a fork of the Adblock Plus version 2.1.2 extension for blocking advertisements on the web, without sponsored ads whitelist."

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

Can Adblock do more than hosts? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Can AdBlock do all hosts do? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Hosts do more than AdBlock, period

[Anonymous Coward]

DDoS IS preventable: AMAZON & MS do a great job of it everyday! DNS has issues hosts overcome (& hosts do FAR MORE than "almost all ads blocked" by a mile, which you don't DARE even *try* prove me wrong on here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... + lighten up DNS server request loads (which admins of them ought to love)...

Hosts COMPLIMENT DNS (the RIGHT DNS that is, see my points on OpenDNS in the post you replied to) overcoming their security redirect weaknesses + being downed, etc. as I stated.

APK

P.S.=> Funny how you don't DARE touch any of my other points here too http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... - no ALL you have is "downmods" (weak) & you certainly haven't done a BETTER PROGRAM that does MORE than my hosts file engine does, yourself, have you, big talker? Go away little boy... you fail! apk

Re:Hosts do more than AdBlock, period

[Coren22]

hosts files cannot block DNS amplification attacks. Remove the line from your cut and paste because it isn't true. No matter how many times you try to redirect, it won't change this fact. This is my last response to you, so you can feel free to continue foaming at the mouth, but it doesn't change facts about how TCP/IP work.

FAR better alternative = hosts files

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

AdBlock = INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Coren22: Does adblock help vs. DNS issues?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does adblock help vs. DNS issues? Not at all. Hosts do http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... no wonder all you and yours have is downmods to try hide apk's points you can't even scratch. We all see his posts and it's hilarious (and about time) someone came along to slashdot here and showed the sockpuppeteers and marketers he won't back down to their utter bullshit (yet they sure go crazy trying to stop apk's points of fact from reputable sources regarding hosts superiority to inferior browser addons).

Re:Coren22: Does adblock help vs. DNS issues?

[Coren22]

What does that have to do with my valid point that hosts can't stop DNS amplification? I never claimed anything about hosts vs adblock. I also didn't claim hosts could do magical things that are technically impossible for it to do.

I have never downmodded an APK post, I would rather poke him until he fixes an obvious mistake in his cut and paste.

Re:Coren22: Does adblock help vs. DNS issues?

[Coren22]

Funny, cause what you replied to pretty well refuted one of APKs points. DNS amplification will not be stopped by the hosts file. You cannot stop a DDOS technique by using a hosts file, it is not logical, and is silly on every level. So, APK can continue spreading misinformation, and you can contnue trying to be his knight, and trolling Slashdot, at least as long as someone isn't using DNS amplification against you.

Re:Coren22: Does adblock help vs. DNS issues?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's no misinformation AdBlock can't stop DNS issues and hosts do.

not news

[luther349]

ad block has had the option to allow non annoying ads for a few years now with the option to block those as well.

AdBlock's FAILED YOU for years

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk :)

Best recommendation = hosts (adblock blows)

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Hosts do that job (& far more) BETTER

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Malware? It's hosted by MalwareBytes!

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't prove MY points on hosts superiority to adblock wrong? http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Yes, you can't, as it's clearly beyond your means: Truth's like that. Get used to it.

You fail.

MalwareBytes hosts + recommends it here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

MalwareBytes = #1 antivirus/antispyware/antimalware out there http://www.av-test.org/en/news... .

* I think THEY know far BETTER than you do, by far, on what's "malware" or not.

APK

P.S.=> How damn WEAK can the "naysayer fanboys" of Adblock OR THEIR ADVERTISING CRONIES USING SOCKPUPPETS TO DOWNMOD MY POSTS BE? Downmodding my points & yet never proving them wrong "the best you got"? Apparently so - it ain't much, lol... especially vs. documented facts + truths I USE by way of comparison... but Please, lol... you fail! apk

Re:Malware? It's hosted by MalwareBytes!

[Anonymous Coward]

I downmodded you, and I'm not a sockpuppet. I'm just sick of hearing your crap. Slashdot comments are not the place for advertisements, go give money to Dice if you want to use Slashdot for ads.
I'm sick of you attacking people who disagree with you, you are showing serious signs of being mentally unstable. Stop your stalking.

Re:Malware? It's hosted by MalwareBytes!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe your shit wouldn't get downmodded if you didn't spam it dozens of times in a thread? Grow a brain, idiot.

P.S.=> Can your hosts program deal with forum spam? I think not!

"Eat your words" moron (they're MalwareBytes)

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject - They host + recommend it: "Note: If you aren't familiar with or are uncomfortable manually editing/replacing, the HOSTS file, I'd suggest using HostsMan or APK Hosts File Engine as these will do it all for you"

* How does "eating your words" taste, flavored with "the BITTER taste of SELF-defeat", rammed down your throat since you're FOOT IS IN YOUR MOUTH too?

LMAO! You FAIL... badly, due to your illiteracy, & laziness...

APK

P.S.=> Of course, lastly, that's MORE than a trolling "ne'er-do-well" such as yourself will *EVER* be able to manage in the art & science of computing... now isn't it? Prove otherwise... apk

Re:"Eat your words" moron (they're MalwareBytes)

[Anonymous Coward]

MalwareBytes does not run that site. MalwareBytes does not recommend your product.

From the home page.

What is hpHosts?
hpHosts is a community managed and maintained hosts file that allows an additional layer of protection against access to ad, tracking and malicious websites.

AdBlock = INFERIOR + 'Souled-Out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

We all know you had to "eat your words"

[Anonymous Coward]

How'd your words taste after apk made you eat them? See here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Using javascript makes YOU a fool

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: What's a MAIN delivery mechanism for malware? Javascript (then Java, Flash, etc.) - you FAIL, badly (even worse considering YOU HAD TO DOWNMOD THE LAST TIME I POSTED THIS HERE proving your UTTER FAIL, easily, in you doing that alone stupid -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... )

* You're STUPID ENOUGH to use javascript on "every site under the sun"? No wonder fools like YOU get infested constantly then!

APK

P.S.=> Amazing: Did you *think* your SINGLE "so-called 'point'" that I just TRASHED EASILY stood up to 17 of mine you can't prove wrong? Wrong... lol! Downmodding to hide your FAIL is what you do, & that only makes ME look all the better for it... thanks!

(Yours = complete bs - ads served inline on the SAME SERVER as a site don't pay also - advertisers don't TRUST webmasters on clickview counts... get real & into the REAL world, where hosts rule vs. browser addons)...?

YOUR b.s. (along with "almost all ads blocked" + other INFERIOR browser addons) just can't stand up to my list of BLATANT INFERIORITIES AdBlock has vs. hosts here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... since your inability to prove those points wrong proves THAT much, easily, for me... apk

Prove me validly wrong instead troll

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't: Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:Prove me validly wrong instead troll

[Anonymous Coward]

Let 'em downmod n' lose their modpoints apk: You've beaten 'em so badly with facts that's all they can do.

Exception @@rules in EasyList/EasyPrivacy/Fanboy

[Anonymous Coward]

Mods, please mod his post up. This is important stuff users need to understand. Posting as AC.

To answer parent post - No, it's not related to the "allow some non-intrusive advertising" checkbox.

The EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Fanboy subscriptions are the culprit. All the exception rules (all filters that start with @@) are the source of the problem. They claim that those exceptions are needed for sites to operate properly. I haven't encountered one exception rule that needed to be enabled to allow sites to load.

You can disable all the @@ ones, but it takes quite some time to do. You can select multiple and hit space to de-select them, but these @@ rules are scattered in multiple places that it's a hassle to do that in multiple passes.

Say you've disabled the @@ exception rules. The next time EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Fanboy updates, you will fined new exception@@ filters. The ones you have disabled won't be touched, but there are constantly new google-related exception rules that are added. You'd need to disable automatic updates.

In Firefox, go to about:config
Set this:
extensions.adblockplus.subscriptions_autoupdate
To False.
This is the only way. You can't disable update throught he extension itself.

Extraordinarily known that hosts = better

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold ou

[Anonymous Coward]

Efficiency

Everything to do with it

[Anonymous Coward]

AdBlock doesn't do jack vs DNS issues: hosts do. AdBlock fails. So do you considering you haven't done a damn thing that does anything against online problems from ads, dns, and all the things hosts help. Apk has.

Hosts work vs. dns issues: Does AdBlock? No

[Anonymous Coward]

Hosts let you avoid DNS & it's security issues galore http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* Have YOU done better than I have on that account? No... anyone can "talk a good game" Coren22... I don't merely TALK, I do things that actually WORK (& are GOOD ENOUGH to be HOSTED & RECOMMENDED by MalwareBytes also http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... so HOW ABOUT YOU? Nothing, of course, by way of comparison... lol!)

(What happens SERVER-SIDE on a site? Not my responsibility: That's the webmasters on the affected site's issue not mine! AMAZON & Microsoft do a GREAT JOB @ not being affected by DDoS... so can anyone else that's serious, because it IS doable & they prove it!)

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-line: By avoiding DNS totally, you avoid it's MANY security issues & hosts do that AND lighten up DNS server request loads, complimenting DNS further in fact which admins of them should love (hosts let you do that, adblock doesn't)... apk

Better question you ran from 3x Forrest

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts & more efficiently? NO -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

YOU FAIL (especially seeing you UNJUSTIFIABLY downmod this post last 3 times I posted it http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & HERE ALSO -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... )

You're CLEARLY UNABLE TO PROVE MY POINTS WRONG VALIDLY & TECHNICALLY on the superiority of hosts vs. ANY single other "so-called 'solution' - especially "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"!

APK

P.S.=> As always, you fail, lol (so does "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" vs. hosts, bigtime)... apk

Re:Better question you ran from 3x Forrest

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor old APK, he's just become a running joke, complete with the delusions he has won arguments here, of course it's only in his mind, maybe we could crowd source some funds to get him the psychiatric help he so obviously needs, poor lunatic.

Re:Better question you ran from 3x Forrest

[Anonymous Coward]

Why can't you prove all of apk's points here wrong then http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... ? You and the other trolls keep making the same mistakes expecting different results. Some define that as insanity you know. You trolls always fail taking on apk. He uses facts with reputable documentation cited. You don't. Minus modding apk isn't making your case either. It's helping his showing us you all try to hide your massive fails against apk's points on hosts giving you more speed, security, and reliability online. Ad hominem attacks like yours also only help apk more too once again making you look poorly failing as you do in resorting to libeling him. Grow up. You might accomplish being hosted and recommended in programs you write like apk has from malwarebytes.

Barb the "TrAnStEsTiCuLaR-MoNsTroSiTy"!

[Anonymous Coward]

BarbaraHudson: "Eat your words"... apk

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"scans multiple forums repeatedly to troll his crappy HOSTS file " - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Sunday January 04, 2015 @11:58AM (#48730581) from http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

I only post on them where they apply (or confronting naysayers like you). Prove otherwise!

(Oh, that's right - you're NOT BIG ON PROOF, are you? See below next...)

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

Re:Barb the "TrAnStEsTiCuLaR-MoNsTroSiTy"!

[BarbaraHudson]

You are SO predictable, as I wrote here.

For those too lazy to click on the link, (because this is Slashdot), I'll reproduce it below: as a public service:

APK always sees red
When people point out the '90s are dead
To him, spamming his HOSTS file
Is really not at all that vile,
Use it or you're dead!

Eventually it'll even be
A replacement for systemd
But don't you fret
'Cuz you can bet
It'll replace Windows registry

So sad, too bad, that those who boast
How good it is, they anonymous post
Because those "others" are just he
Hiding behind anonymity
Otherwise "they" would be toast.

And he attacks anyone
Who criticizes spamming he as done
He posts crap-floods filled with hate
Trying to intimidate
So now critics post anon.

Alexander P Kowalski
Do your worst, you will see
You're still a fool,
A royal tool,
You're hurting yourself, not me,

Burma Shave

I guess I can expect another 500 to 1000 anonymous personal attacks from you again, just like the last time. So have fun going through my posting history for the next few days - all you're doing is showing that you have to hide behind anonymity because you're a spammer, not just here, but in other forums.

Re: Barb the "TrAnStEsTiCuLaR-MoNsTroSiTy"!

[Ash-Fox]

You should see what happens when I show APK my DNS solutions are better. He can go on for weeks.

Re: Barb the "TrAnStEsTiCuLaR-MoNsTroSiTy"!

[Falconhell]

Yeh I've enjoyed baiting him and watching him go berserk occasionally, but he is so repetitive and boring it's no fun any more. Poor deluded fool even thinks he wins arguments. :)

Re: Barb the "TrAnStEsTiCuLaR-MoNsTroSiTy"!

[BarbaraHudson]

I understand why he does it - he has no choice. For him, clinging to his hosts file is what gives him relevance in his own eyes. His entire psyche revolves around it, and he has to try to shout the disbelievers into silence, or shame them into silence.

As someone else wrote, "his hosts file whispers to him while he sleeps." It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Privoxy

[Thelxepeia]

I've used http://www.privoxy.org/ this for years. No external lists, doesn't look at hosts, works at system, not browser, level and is open source. For desktop only, though.

Eat your words "TrAnStEsTiCuLaR-MoNsTroSiTy"

[Anonymous Coward]

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Prove adblock does all hosts do below:

1.) Protect vs. malicious servers (past ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C server communication
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C server communication
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C server communication
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns logs
14.) Speed up websurfing (adblocks & hardcoded favs)
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (e.g. stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easy texteditor data control
17.) Do all that more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage vs. adblock

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Can AdBlock do all hosts can? NO

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Coren22: Does adblock help vs. DNS issues?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not at all. Hosts do http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... no wonder all you and yours have is downmods to try hide apk's points you can't even scratch. We all see his posts and it's hilarious (and about time) someone came along to slashdot here and showed the sockpuppeteers and marketers he won't back down to their utter bullshit (yet they sure go crazy trying to stop apk's points of fact from reputable sources regarding hosts superiority to inferior browser addons). What happens server side is the DNS admin (or Paul Vixie the PhD blowhard who designed that security issue riddled wreckage) or webmasters problem, not apk's.

Ok Cederic: A fair challenge to you... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Apk, Cederic's a pussy

[Anonymous Coward]

Cederic's going to downmod that to hide it again for the 4th time he's run from it.

Re:Apk, Cederic's a pussy

[Cederic]

Cederic's highly amused that several days later someone's come in and flamebait spammed his post.

Guess someone can't take the criticism.

Why's your "hero" Cederic running then?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's downmodded + evaded a fair challenge to him 4 times now http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Why's your "hero" Cederic running then?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not running.

He's simply not wasting his time on a spammer. apk is a spammer. There's no "fair challenge" here.

Normal reasonable people don't pursue arguments or try to prove points the way apk does. The behavior on apk's part shows that there are psychological problems at play here.

Get help, apk. You have genuine mental issues and you should seek treatment before you hurt someone you care about.

Pussies (Cederic) evading a fair challenge?

[Anonymous Coward]

For a 4th time too (downmods galore to hide it though) http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... ?? You're a PUSSY Cederic and a punk!

FTFY: @ BEST hosts file (vs. addons crap)

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Re:I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold ou

[Anonymous Coward]

Please explain how uBlock is better.

uBlock uses less memory/CPU cycles

Simple: Don't make invasive ads

[Trogre]

Look, if an ad isn't invasive then I don't mind seeing it and won't block it.

Slashdot still offers me a "disable ad" option that I leave unchecked. Why? Because I don't mind the kind of ads I see here, and recognise that such sites need to pay their way somehow.

Ad blockers wouldn't need to exist if ad companies didn't put out obnoxious, inappropriate and just downright dishonest ads in the first place.

Now excuse me while I claim my prize for being the 10,000,000th visitor to this site...

As an advertiser I don't object to AdBlock Plus

[Anonymous Coward]

I own a business and have an advertisements on one site that is blocked unfortunately due to the fact they allow animated (GIF) advertisements. We are one of no more than a dozen advertisers. In any event I still don't object to AdBlock Plus's conditions. They are reasonable. I do wish the owner of the site would change the policy as it does mean fewer people will see our advertisement as we can't currently get on the white list. None of the actual advertisements are actually that obtrusive- but none-the-less.

I use AdBlock plus on a computer for which I visit sites with obtrusive advertising.

Easylists's whitelist

[Anonymous Coward]

Has anyone actually LOOKED at Easylist's whitelisted items?

https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easylist.txt

noscript

[Lehk228]

you should be using noscript to block third party content.

ABP is really just to block inline youtube ads.

Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Anonymous Coward]

DNS = more power & resource consumption than hosts, adding on more complexity + room for breakdown & CERTAINLY EXPLOIT (dns redirect poisoning, amplification attacks, dynamic DNS using botnets, etc.)

* YOU, like the transsexual weirdo Tom/BarbaraHudson, are MORE THAN WELCOME to prove EVERY POINT OF MINE here, wrong -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

(Which of course, you CAN'T DO, since YOU have FAILED HUGELY @ it before Ash-Fox -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... where a DUMB SHIT LIKE YOU DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THE STUPID MISTAKE YOU MADE WAS CORRECTABLE for hosts... lol! )

APK

P.S.=> Hosts get you past DNS issues, actually complimenting DNS by lightening its request loads (admins of DNS should love hosts files users for that), & shoring up those security issues it has UNTIL THE FOOLS WHO BUILT THAT SHREDDED SECURITY ISSUE WRECK FINALLY GET SMART & FIX IT TOTALLY... apk

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Ash-Fox]

YOU, like the transsexual weirdo Tom/BarbaraHudson

Why are you singling this person out for being a transsexual?

Is 'weirdo' directed at at their character or is this is a form of transphobia?

Do you think argumentum ad hominem proves your points better and makes your character look justified?

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[BarbaraHudson]

Nah, he just has a "thing" for me :-)

Seriously, he has nothing else to live for except his hosts file. It's what gives meaning to his existence, and he uses it as both a lever and an excuse to browbeat others. It's why most people who reply to him do so anonymously nowadays - and why he keeps thinking that many of those anonymous posts are from me (none of them are).

However, he does serve a purpose - he gives an insight into why "haters gotta hate". Some people just can't accept change. Before the internet, he'd just sit there and grumble under his breath. The internet gives him a platform and a sense of empowerment, that if he posts long enough, loud enough, he'll "win".

And lets face it - he's good for comic relief, as well as practice in not letting spamming trolls get under your skin :-)

Of course, I could be wrong, and it's due to him eating too many paint chips as a kid.

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apk exposed you for the troll trash you are http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... care to debate that? You shot your mouth off on hosts, he shut it with facts. So much so, you ran, lol! Then you are also exposed sockpuppeting there as well. You're trash, plain and simple, as well as obviously sick in the head what with your sex change attempt since you failed as a man. Clue: You're not a real woman. Can you bear kids? No. You're sick in the head. You can't accept yourself as a man. Nobody can accept you as a fake woman. Did you expect others to accept you when you can't even accept yourself? No way that's happening. Especially since you are a bigmouth that apk smacked down, so badly in that link above, you lowered yourself to stalking him by ac posts. You're scum and we all know it. You do too. Ever wonder why you've got diseases like diabetes galore, you live alone with a dog, nobody wants you, and your harddrives all blew up as you've stated (when you were really banned here for a year due to sockpuppetry)? Don't. You're lousy on karma in life and it's coming back to you weirdo.

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Anonymous Coward]

BarbaraHudson, a fact: You came in here off topic trolling apk http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Barbie you tried to browbeat apk - he beat your ass w/ fact http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... on hosts no less, lol. "Oh, the shame of it". You came into this post off topic bugging him and got your tail handed to you again. How stupid do you think we are? Answer is not as stupid as yourself fooling yourself that your bullshit is fooling anyone but yourself, sicko.

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Ash-Fox]

Seriously, he has nothing else to live for except his hosts file.

Honestly, he's quite fascinating and quite quick to declare victory, make threats etc. One of my favourite instances of this, is this article someone wrote about someone doing Internet threats to sue them, when who should appear, but APK. He then discovers the existence of this article and continues on in the comments.

However, he does serve a purpose - he gives an insight into why "haters gotta hate".

I think he's really differen, I have not seen people as passionate about this sort of thing in IT. The only passionate reactions to continue with such longevity is things I see from groups like the Taliban/ISIS - Which really leaves a question about his psyche and motivations.

The internet gives him a platform and a sense of empowerment, that if he posts long enough, loud enough, he'll "win".

Yes, he's definately good at making use of argumentum ad nauseum.

And lets face it - he's good for comic relief

I did get some amusement from him. I was fascinated by someone who remembered that years ago I responded to one of his posts with just 'cool story, bro' when he made this massive post that was far overdone and had various fallacies that I had completely forgotten. I later interacted with him and he linked that comment (that I honestly couldn't remember) and went on a rant that I am troll (most of my posts weren't trolling towards him).

It's unfortunate that he won't entertain the idea of talking to me about other subjects. I'm curious about him, I wonder if he really is prejudiced against trans-sexuals. I wonder why he lives with a room mate (he's told me as such) and not alone or with a wife etc.

keeps thinking that many of those anonymous posts are from me (none of them are).

Oh yeah, I've seen him do that to a few people previously.

Of course, I could be wrong, and it's due to him eating too many paint chips as a kid.

I honestly think he just doesn't like losing arguments and has no mental issues.

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Barbie it was more fun seeing apk make you eat your words http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... Hahahahahaha and all you have after that, is your geek angst and off topic trolling. Doesn't stand up too well to that 1st link above where you are quoted being destroyed by apk systematically and how you sockpuppet and troll him too http://slashdot.org/comments.p... so you? Are full of shit. Get a clue: Slashdot in its entirely KNOWS about you, see Hairyfeet here even stating it (he's respected here, you are not) http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Barbie, apk's yet to lose an argument to you. You lost to him http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:Ash-Fox needs an ass-whippin' again?

[BarbaraHudson]

He's threatened to sue me for libel for "damaging his good name". I pointed out that he's known all over the net as the Hosts File Troll, so it's simply impossible for me to damage his name or reputation. I also said to feel free to have his lawyer contact me and I'll tell him where to serve me. Nothing happened except more empty threats.

I've also repeatedly pointed out that the spamming and the personal attacks are what got him such a low reputation to begin with.

So now I don't bother replying to him any more. Problem solved. And when I log in and see there's 120 replies to my posts, and over 100 are anonymous, I know he's lost it again :-)

His animosity towards me in particular is probably from when I organized a campaign to troll the troll, complete with instructions. Things like logging in anonymously to pretend you're him, and watch him fight as to who the real APK is. The solution, of course, would be to get an account, but he can't. Banned.

Of course, he makes the same claim about me "being banned for a year." Simply not true - I couldn't use a computer (or read a book, or a lot of other stuff) due to bleeding retinas. I did once receive the "pink page of death" for 3 days due to someone mod-bombing me, but that just gave me an excuse to take a break :-)

He's some strange brew ...

AdBlock = INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

You FAIL scumbag... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Malware? It's hosted & RECOMMENDED by MalwareBytes here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & who gives a SHIT what you "think" (don't try, you're TOO stupid to live, let alone think) when you can't prove my points on hosts superiority to "almost ALL ads blocked" & other addons outright validly wrong here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... ??

* You're a SNIVELLING little worm that is more of a woman than a man, since "the best you got" is a line of UTTER bullshit, vs. proving me wrong instead!

APK

P.S.=> Want me to stop advertiser? PROVE ME WRONG... then again, WE BOTH KNOW you CAN'T DO IT or you would have LONG AGO by now, considering it's your ill-gotten "coins" you're scrabbling over now in fear of myself & hosts, which you CANNOT BUY or cripple, like adblock (nobody can prove me wrong on hosts superiority to adblock in terms of resources used (less with hosts by FAR) & in terms of hosts superior abilities for gaining speed, security, + reliability online: You can *try* but you'll fail, as it's impossible to get the better of me... lol!)... apk

It's recommended & hosted by MalwareBytes

[Anonymous Coward]

MalwareBytes hosts + recommends it here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

MalwareBytes = #1 antivirus/antispyware/antimalware out there http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

STILL can't prove MY points on hosts superiority to adblock wrong too?

Ok then - Here they are AGAIN, for your reference (so you can see what CRUSHED your lame ass again despite your numerous downmods of my posts) -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

LOL: You can't: You know it, I KNOW IT, & so does anyone else reading since all you have is unjustifiable downmods vs. proving me wrong - so, it's clearly beyond your means - NewsFlash: Truth's like that. Get used to it.

You fail.

* Lastly -I KNOW that MalwareBytes knows far BETTER than you do, by far, on what's "malware" or not, dumbass...

APK

P.S.=> How damn WEAK can the "naysayer fanboys" of Adblock OR THEIR ADVERTISING CRONIES USING SOCKPUPPETS TO DOWNMOD MY POSTS BE? Downmodding my points & yet never proving them wrong "the best you got"? Apparently so - it ain't much, lol... especially vs. documented facts + truths I USE by way of comparison... but Please, lol... you fail! apk

If it uses hostnames, hosts can block it

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: It's EXACTLY how I blocked CryptoLocker (DGA names are available from good guys like Gar Warner & I get them + add them as blocked to hosts - same with adbanner servers too!).

Case closed!

FACT: Hosts are FAR superior to *ANY* single "so-called 'solutions'" out there for more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity (to a lesser extent on the latter) - let's see "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" do the same!

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-line FACT: Hosts work for FAR MORE than "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" by far, & FAR MORE EFFICIENTLY also -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & I don't see *ANYONE* able to validly disprove those points of mine on that note... lol! apk

BarbaraHudson "eat your words" (again)

[Anonymous Coward]

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"scans multiple forums repeatedly to troll his crappy HOSTS file " - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Sunday January 04, 2015 @11:58AM (#48730581) from http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

I only post on them where they apply (or confronting naysayers like you). Prove otherwise!

(Oh, that's right - you're NOT BIG ON PROOF, are you? See below next...)

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apkcid=48762101

Owner's a MalwareBytes employee

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject, it's fact: Write him yourself, & "Powered by MalwareBytes" = just that - he's an employee of theirs & it IS part of MalwareBytes!

(In case you didn't KNOW it, MalwareBytes IS that definition: A community of like-minded computer pros working to make things BETTER online in computing!)

APK

P.S.=> Show me, show us ALL, you've done better... lol, we'll be waiting till "the 12th of NEVER" for that!

So, You can "mince words" all DAY, but the fact remains a trolling LOW-LIFE like yourself will NEVER *ever* be able to accomplish what I have in computing, lol... ever (you know it, I know it, hell... everyone/anyone READING does - or you'd have done it by now, & clearly, you have NOT)... apk

Hosts certainly are & /. troll-proof too!

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: After all - NOBODY on /. ever validly technically proves me wrong here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

APK

P.S.=> I pity the idiots downmodding my posts yet FAILING to prove my points in that link above incorrect validly (they can't) & judging by their "frantic efforts" expending 100's of modpoints to "hide it" via unjustifiable downmods (which I just post again, exhausting them of their 1 'whimp weapon' that gets ABUSED here massively in the bullshit "moderation system" by sockpuppeteer, which marketers are KNOWN to use)?

They are AFRAID AS HELL of hosts & should be...

The ones downmodding me? Doesn't take a brain who it REALLY is:

Advertisers/Marketers, & Webmasters (which IF you two groups of MORONS would've paid more attention to what went into your ads, like malicious code that infects us, I never would have released my program @ all, assholes)

Botnet masters/malware makers

OR

INFERIOR COMPETITORS (like "Almost ALL Ads Blocked")...apk

FastFlux botnets REUSE hostnames

[Anonymous Coward]

"So you've got aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa124.adserver.com listed in your hosts file? Why are you wasting that space? They'll never use that hostname ever again." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @06:14PM (#48974579)

See subject: You're WRONG (they ought to since they're PAID for) & if malware uses hostnames, HOST CAN BLOCK IT!

APK

P.S.=> You overlook a MAJORLY dangerous feature botnets use rampantly in "FastFlux" botnet design recycling hostsnames they used in the past, reusing them again... apk

Re:FastFlux botnets REUSE hostnames

[Anonymous Coward]

recycling hostsnames they used in the past

That's because they are shitty botnets. And it's not a "MAJORLY dangerous" feature when you can knock them out with a trivial oneliner in a hosts file. With a $5 domain from godaddy I can make well more than 38^240 hostnames without paying a penny more. Why the fuck would I ever recycle one? I could use one hostname a second and not even make a dent in the list by the time the sun goes tits up billions years from now (if my math is right I'd have 4.5e362 hostnames left after the nova), all for $5/yr. If I don't do something stupid like run an illegal botnet with my domain, it's not going to get revoked, and your hosts file isn't going to do a thing about it.

The only reason google ads and the other shitty old ad networks don't do that is because they'd have to go back to all their users and tell them to replace their ad code, but believe me, this is coming, because when every single ad impression is a unique little snowflake, there will be absolutely no question as to who is tracking you, mister "apk-1581581251250asfdasd8fff3g39g90em3.adserver.com" and that will ultimately be worth more than even google's massive ad network. Feel free to keep screaming at me that I am WRONG, it changes nothing. Look forward to sites being paid a bonus to encrypt your information and set it in the hostname. base36 may not be as efficient as base64 but there's plenty of space there for your name, address and the last thing you bought and a random nonce to make sure you never get the same hostname twice, read and decrypted by the adserver.

Hell, you want to talk malware? IPv4-over-DNS. Enjoy tracking down how your data is leaking out when all you can see on your network is some DNS requests to the same DNS server you've been using.

All I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more. The rabbit hole will continue to go deeper with or without you.

You do realise Adblock's inferior vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less:

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST of antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

There's no argument: Hosts = better

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Prove these points validly wrong http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... Falconweasel...

* Good luck - but, you'll need MORE than that: You'll need a miracle (as there's no proving facts & truth wrong)...

APK

P.S.=> Go on now, lol - let's see YOU "go BeRseRk" even *trying* to take that challenge of mine (you won't & you'll evade it to no end , vs. myself)

BarbaraHudson: "Eat your words" again

[Anonymous Coward]

I've shot you to pieces easily before you big talking do nothing zero FREAK (transtesticle weirdo that you are), easily, due to your big mouth writing checks your lame no skills in computing ass can't cash! You have no relevance, I do via hosts (you're right) See MalwareBytes below loser (you've done BETTER? No, lol - waste of LIFE that a freak like YOU, are):

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

blackomegax = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Vs. APK you downmod & ran from a fair challenge http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

No argument: Hosts = better than AdBlock

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Prove my points wrong -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... technically validly, Falconweasel...

* Good luck - but, you'll need MORE than that: You'll need a miracle (as there's no proving facts & truth wrong)...

(Go on now, lol - let's see YOU "go BeRseRk" even *trying* to take that challenge of mine (you won't & you'll evade it to no end...))

APK

P.S.=> FalconWeasel (lmao) "went BeRseRk" with the downmod points never validly disproving them (vs. my fair challenge ONCE already, here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... )... "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" = FalconWally, lol! apk

BarbaraHudson: "Eat your words" again

[Anonymous Coward]

I've shot you to pieces easily before you big talking do nothing zero FREAK (transtesticle weirdo that you are), easily, due to your big mouth writing checks your lame no skills in computing ass can't cash! Proof? Ok, below:

You are IRRELEVANT: I'm not via hosts (you're right) See MalwareBytes below loser (you've done BETTER? No, lol - waste of LIFE that a freak like YOU, are):

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

If an adsource uses hostnames?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: It's blockable in hosts (& that's only 1 thing hosts does, better than adblock, more efficiently as well - the rest for more speed, security, & reliability are here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... which you OBVIOUSLY cannot VALIDLY TECHNICALLY PROVE ME WRONG ON - period!)

Inlined ads? Served from the SAME site?? LMAO - those DO NOT PAY, as the advertisers do NOT TRUST WEBMASTERS on clickview counts... so, get real, & get back in the REAL world pal!

APK

P.S.=> The FACT you weak little weasels can't prove my points validly technically wrong, AND, that all you have is unjustifiable downmods (vs. hosts PROVEN to do more for speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity over inefficient REDUNDANT browser addons) proves my points for me...

Call it "SPAM" all you like (as that's all you've got & it's PUREST bullshit vs. facts I use from reputable sources) - everyone KNOWS that's the 'cry of the defeated inferior competitor or advertisers - especially when everyone SEES you "running" from proving me wrong, "Forrest"... apk

privoxy

[Anonymous Coward]

Try that

Does that include not serving malware?

[jonwil]

Does this "acceptable ads" policy include a requirement that the ad servers in question not be serving malware alongside the ads?

Because that is by far the biggest reason I run an ad blocker.

No, Cederic definitely ran

[Anonymous Coward]

Vs facts of apk's that Cederic can't prove wrong in their entirety http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

BarbaraHudson: "Eat your words" again

[Anonymous Coward]

You're not RELEVANT: I am, via hosts (you're right http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... ) See MalwareBytes below loser (you've done BETTER? No, lol - waste of LIFE that a freak like YOU, are):

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

Shitty botnets eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: That's the "best you've got"? LMAO: They're most used to spam is more like it due to fastflux reuse of hostnames.

As long as a hostname is used, hosts block them, & for SURE, there IS no problem again vs. it, ever.

DNS & it's issues? NO PROBLEM: I avoid it using my favorite 24 sites @ the top of hosts file cached in RAM operating in kernelmode via the diskcaching subsystem operating in conjunction with the IP stack itself, & that IS where I spend a GOOD *** 95++% of my time online (per my router logs analyzed) & like TV? I, like everyone else online too, has favorites they do the SAME at - which is how hosts rock for local resolution from RAM, & assure evading DNS request logs, & even bypassing DNSBLs... This works for speed, where I NEED IT MOST, where I go most (good for up to 2-3 MILLION slower remote DNS indexed queries, do the math) & reliability vs. downed or redirect poisoned DNS (rampant problem).

Plus, hosts lighten up DNS server admin's request loads - hosts COMPLIMENT DNS shoring up their security issues (for users) & helping DNS admins that way (multi-bonus).

APK

P.S.=> YOU can't seem to grasp that once I have a hostname blocked in hosts, NOTHING from there can *ever* harm me... ever. If they go dead, eventually, I'll purge my file (hell, my app provides a way to do it for my ENTIRE hostsfile easily, not the only or best way maybe, but it helps) but otherwise? I know I am totally safe, & yet my system FLIES with even a HUGE hosts file I've built up in size (to see how far I can push this too mind you on size) since 1997, to see if it adversely affects performance: It doesn't. Not a bit. Kernelmode & efficient use of what I have makes it so, & it's great... apk

Hosts certainly are & /. troll-proof too!

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: NOBODY on /. ever validly technically proves me wrong here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

APK

P.S.=> I pity the idiots downmodding my posts yet FAILING to prove my points in that link above incorrect validly (they can't) & judging by their "frantic efforts" expending 100's of modpoints to "hide it" via unjustifiable downmods (which I just post again, exhausting them of their 1 'whimp weapon' that gets ABUSED here massively in the bullshit "moderation system" by sockpuppeteer, which marketers are KNOWN to use)?

They are AFRAID AS HELL of hosts & should be...

The ones downmodding me? Doesn't take a brain to KNOWN who it REALLY is:

Advertisers/Marketers, & Webmasters (which IF you two groups of MORONS would've paid more attention to what went into your ads, like malicious code that infects us, I never would have released my program @ all, assholes)

Botnet masters/malware makers

OR

INFERIOR COMPETITORS (like "Almost ALL Ads Blocked")...apk

Adblock = Inferior CRAP vs. Hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 17 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. DNS amplification attacks
8.) Protect vs. trackers
9.) Protect vs. spam
10.) Protect vs. phishing
11.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
12.) Get you past a dnsbl
13.) Keep you off dns request logs
14.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
15.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
16.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
17.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

You FAIL, scumbag

[Anonymous Coward]

Malware? It's hosted & RECOMMENDED by MalwareBytes here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & who gives a SHIT what you "think" (don't try, you're TOO stupid to live, let alone think) when you can't prove my points on hosts superiority to "almost ALL ads blocked" & other addons outright validly wrong here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* You're a SNIVELLING little worm that is more of a woman than a man, since "the best you got" is a line of UTTER bullshit, vs. proving me wrong instead!

APK

P.S.=> Want me to stop advertiser? PROVE ME WRONG... then again, WE BOTH KNOW you CAN'T DO IT or you would have LONG AGO by now, considering it's your ill-gotten "coins" you're scrabbling over now in fear of myself & hosts, which you CANNOT BUY or cripple, like adblock (nobody can prove me wrong on hosts superiority to adblock in terms of resources used (less with hosts by FAR) & in terms of hosts superior abilities for gaining speed, security, + reliability online: You can *try* but you'll fail, as it's impossible to get the better of me... lol!)... apk

Malware? It's hosted by MalwareBytes

[Anonymous Coward]

MalwareBytes hosts + recommends it here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

MalwareBytes = #1 antivirus/antispyware/antimalware out there http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

I KNOW that MalwareBytes knows far BETTER than you do, by far, on what's "malware" or not, dumbass...

STILL can't prove MY points on hosts superiority to adblock wrong too? Here they are AGAIN, for your reference (so you can see what CRUSHED your lame ass again despite your numerous downmods of my posts) -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

LOL!

You can't: You know it, I KNOW IT, & so does anyone else reading since all you have is unjustifiable downmods vs. proving me wrong - so, it's clearly beyond your means - NewsFlash: Truth's like that. Get used to it.

You fail.

APK

P.S.=> How damn WEAK can the "naysayer fanboys" of Adblock OR THEIR ADVERTISING CRONIES USING SOCKPUPPETS TO DOWNMOD MY POSTS BE? Downmodding my points & yet never proving them wrong "the best you got"? Apparently so - it ain't much, lol... especially vs. documented facts + truths I USE by way of comparison... you fail! apk

Eat YOUR words, moron

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject - They host + recommend it: "Note: If you aren't familiar with or are uncomfortable manually editing/replacing, the HOSTS file, I'd suggest using HostsMan or APK Hosts File Engine as these will do it all for you" from http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

* How does "eating your words" taste, flavored with "the BITTER taste of SELF-defeat", rammed down your throat since you're FOOT IS IN YOUR MOUTH too?

LMAO!

You FAIL... badly - ESPECIALLY YOUR SOCKPUPPET DOWNMODDING THE LAST TIME I POSTED THIS HERE -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

APK

P.S.=> Of course, lastly, that's MORE than a trolling SOCKPUPPETING "ne'er-do-well" such as yourself will *EVER* be able to manage in the art & science of computing... now isn't it? Prove otherwise... apk

Seeing you trolls "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"

[Anonymous Coward]

Unable to prove apk wrong led me to conclude U FAIL http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... on every conceivable level there is here against facts apk put out documented by respectable sources since adblock's clearly inferior to hosts in abilities for more speed, security, reliability, and even anonymity as well as adblock's massive inferiority in terms of resources used and usermode slower redundant level of operation vs. hosts in kernelmode doing more with less and the best you have is that line of bullshit, the cry of the defeated impotent advertiser working in collusion with the inferior sold out crippled by default competitor adblock (or shall we call it almost all ads blocked since it's paid off to be crippled not doing the 1 job it had)? Please. Go away. If you're reduced to that instead of proving apk wrong validly on a technical level here then you have failed miserably.

Calling apk "troll"

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't prove apk's points on hosts wrong (better than adblock) http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

AshFox FAILURES listed

[Anonymous Coward]

Making you concede DNS has issues vs. custom hosts files on numerous points here -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... on:

1.) DNS using excess power
2.) DNS using excess cpu cycles
3.) DNS using excess memory
4.) DNS using excess I/O
5.) DNS using excess "moving parts" complexity

(#1 - #5 above in comparison to custom hosts files)

6.) DNS having security vulnerabilities that hosts files fix, + that your "fix" against dns redirect poisoning DOUBLES your overheads (using TCP vs. UDP the default) creating yet MORE INEFFICIENCY in your doing so...

* :)

(Along with the fact you can't show ANYONE ANYTHING you've ever done in the art & science of computing... especially in comparison to myself)

APK

P.S.=> What was even more "priceless" was your "I was pretending" garbage here too -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... where I pointed out fastflux, & dynamic DNS utilizing botnets abusing DNS servers taking advantage of their VERY NATURE to do exploits on users - so the ONLY thing you are "pretending" on, is that you are PRETENDING to know a damn thing about computing, lol & that ALL proves it... apk

Training the advertisers

[chris-chittleborough]

I see another possible benefit to Eyeo's "acceptable ads" policy: training advertisers that unobstrusive ads are more useful than attention-grabbing monstrosities. (Perhaps I'm being too optimistic?)

Re:I've been using Adblock Edge since Plus sold ou

[Anonymous Coward]

years ago. Please explain how uBlock is better.

I *NEVER* see ads (or get the malware from them) on the machines that use Adblock Edge in Firefox, how does it get better than that?

It gets better in that uBlock has much better performance than AdBlock, AdBlock Plus or any of their derivatives. It also has a better element selector.

BarbaraHudson "eat your words"

[Anonymous Coward]

You are IRRELEVANT: I'm not via hosts (you're right) See MalwareBytes below loser (you've done BETTER? No, lol - waste of LIFE that a freak like YOU, are):

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

Malware? It's hosted by MalwareBytes!

[Anonymous Coward]

Malware? It's hosted & RECOMMENDED by MalwareBytes here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & who gives a SHIT what you "think" (don't try, you're TOO stupid to live, let alone think) when you can't prove my points on hosts superiority to "almost ALL ads blocked" & other addons outright validly wrong here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* You're a SNIVELLING little worm that is more of a woman than a man, since "the best you got" is a line of UTTER bullshit, vs. proving me wrong instead!

APK

P.S.=> Want me to stop advertiser? PROVE ME WRONG... then again, WE BOTH KNOW you CAN'T DO IT or you would have LONG AGO by now, considering it's your ill-gotten "coins" you're scrabbling over now in fear of myself & hosts, which you CANNOT BUY or cripple, like adblock (nobody can prove me wrong on hosts superiority to adblock in terms of resources used (less with hosts by FAR) & in terms of hosts superior abilities for gaining speed, security, + reliability online: You can *try* but you'll fail, as it's impossible to get the better of me... lol!)... apk

It's hosted + recommended by MalwareBytes

[Anonymous Coward]

MalwareBytes hosts + recommends it here http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... [hosts-file.net]

MalwareBytes = #1 antivirus/antispyware/antimalware out there http://www.av-test.org/en/news... [av-test.org]

I KNOW that MalwareBytes knows far BETTER than you do, by far, on what's "malware" or not, dumbass...

STILL can't prove MY points on hosts superiority to adblock wrong too? Here they are AGAIN, for your reference (so you can see what CRUSHED your lame ass again despite your numerous downmods of my posts) -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... [slashdot.org]

LOL!

You can't: You know it, I KNOW IT, & so does anyone else reading since all you have is unjustifiable downmods vs. proving me wrong - so, it's clearly beyond your means - NewsFlash: Truth's like that. Get used to it.

You fail.

APK

P.S.=> How damn WEAK can the "naysayer fanboys" of Adblock OR THEIR ADVERTISING CRONIES USING SOCKPUPPETS TO DOWNMOD MY POSTS BE? Downmodding my points & yet never proving them wrong "the best you got"? Apparently so - it ain't much, lol... especially vs. documented facts + truths I USE by way of comparison... you fail! apk

Shitty botnets, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: That's the "best you've got"? LMAO: They're most used to spam is more like it due to fastflux reuse of hostnames.

FACT: As long as a hostname in hosts is blocked, there IS no problem again vs. it, ever.

DNS & it's issues? NO PROBLEM:

I avoid it using my favorite 24 sites @ the top of hosts file cached in RAM operating in kernelmode via the diskcaching subsystem operating in conjunction with the IP stack itself, & that IS where I spend a GOOD *** 95++% of my time online (per my router logs analyzed) & like TV?

I, like everyone else online too, has favorites they do the SAME at - which is how hosts rock for local resolution from RAM, & assure evading DNS request logs, & even bypassing DNSBLs...

This works for speed, where I NEED IT MOST, where I go most (good for up to 2-3 MILLION slower remote DNS indexed queries, do the math) & reliability vs. downed or redirect poisoned DNS (rampant problem).

Plus, hosts lighten up DNS server admin's request loads - hosts COMPLIMENT DNS shoring up their security issues (for users) & helping DNS admins that way (multi-bonus).

APK

P.S.=> YOU can't seem to grasp that once I have a hostname blocked in hosts, NOTHING from there can *ever* harm me... ever.

If they go dead, eventually, I'll purge my file (hell, my app provides a way to do it for my ENTIRE hostsfile easily, not the only or best way maybe, but it helps) but otherwise?

I know I am totally safe, & yet my system FLIES with even a HUGE hosts file I've built up in size (to see how far I can push this too mind you on size) since 1997, to see if it adversely affects performance: It doesn't. Not a bit.

Kernelmode & efficient use of what I have makes it so, & it's great... apk

If it uses hostsnames, hosts can block it

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: It's EXACTLY how I blocked CryptoLocker (DGA names are available from good guys like Gar Warner & I get them + add them as blocked to hosts - same with adbanner servers too!).

Case closed!

FACT: Hosts are FAR superior to *ANY* single "so-called 'solutions'" out there for more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity (to a lesser extent on the latter) - let's see "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" do the same!

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-line FACT: Hosts work for FAR MORE than "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" by far, & FAR MORE EFFICIENTLY also -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & I don't see *ANYONE* able to validly disprove those points of mine on that note... lol! apk

We all know apk made you eat your words

[Anonymous Coward]

How'd your words taste after apk made you eat them? See here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

EAT YOUR WORDS, moron

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject - They host + recommend it: "Note: If you aren't familiar with or are uncomfortable manually editing/replacing, the HOSTS file, I'd suggest using HostsMan or APK Hosts File Engine as these will do it all for you" from http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

* How does "eating your words" taste, flavored with "the BITTER taste of SELF-defeat", rammed down your throat since you're FOOT IS IN YOUR MOUTH too?

LMAO!

You FAIL... badly - ESPECIALLY YOUR SOCKPUPPET DOWNMODDING THE LAST 2 TIMES I POSTED THIS HERE -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & here too http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

APK

P.S.=> Of course, lastly, that's MORE than a trolling SOCKPUPPETING "ne'er-do-well" such as yourself will *EVER* be able to manage in the art & science of computing... now isn't it? Prove otherwise... apk

Eat your words AGAIN moron

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject, it's fact: Write him yourself, & "Powered by MalwareBytes" = just that - he's an employee of theirs & it IS part of MalwareBytes.

(In case you didn't KNOW it, MalwareBytes IS that definition: A community of like-minded computer pros working to make things BETTER online in computing!)

APK

P.S.=> Show me, show us ALL, you've done better... lol, we'll be waiting till "the 12th of NEVER" for that!

So, You can "mince words" all DAY, but the fact remains a trolling LOW-LIFE like yourself will NEVER *ever* be able to accomplish what I have in computing, lol... ever (you know it, I know it, hell... everyone/anyone READING does - or you'd have done it by now, & clearly, you have NOT)... apk

Adblock = Inferior CRAP vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

You do realize Adblock's INFERIOR vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Coren22, serverside, what port is used?

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: During a DNS Amplification attack, what port is sending the flood from the DNS being attacked, to the server being DDoS'd?

* ANSWER ME THAT - Otherwise, you have a point I'll concede & YOU would be a "FIRST" I've *EVER* had to do that with (that's what I get for being over-zealous perhaps on THAT particular point, but there ARE 16 others you can't touch, but we'll see... depends on your answer though).

APK

P.S.=> Since you're looking @ this from a SERVER-SIDE perspective (I'm not, I am PURE user/clientside via hosts), let me know the answer to that, & I *might* have something that surprises you, for server-side, using hosts... apk

Re:Coren22, serverside, what port is used?

[Coren22]

In DNS amplification attacks, party A sends packet to DNS server B which causes a huge amount (70x) traffic to flow to party C. The connection being DDoSed (party C, not server B) receives the traffic reguardless of how their name resolution is setup. This isn't server side, this is your connection being flooded. This has no effect on the DNS server as they have far better pipes than you do. This causes your router to be a smoking crater, hosts file or not.

I am looking at this from a client perspective, the one who is getting DDoSed by a DNS amplification attack. You seem to be looking at it from the uninterested party perspective of person D, where it generally won't matter anyways as you will notice DNS being slow and switch to another one.

I am not sure exactly what you mean by port, https://technet.microsoft.com/... the TCP sessions happen from source port 53 to any port. When doing a DNS amplification attack, the DNS server is being spoofed into sending massive amounts of traffic to a third party, these servers usually have very large connections as they are the lifeblood of the Internet, so they don't go offline during an attack, but the victim is the one that has issues due to DNS amplification, my 75Mbit connection won't hold up against 7Gbit of traffic from a DNS amplification attack

Then, the ONLY thing to do here is

[Anonymous Coward]

0.0.0.0 ServerFloodingYOURWebServer.com: 53 , server-side, in hosts (that literally *WOULD* stop the floods on the port concerned, IF necessary - Especially WHEN you KNOW it's causing issues).

* Hosts used THAT way, server side (the server under "attack") will do the job BLOCKING "the attacker", & under ANY amount of "loads"...

APK

P.S.=> Well? apk

Re:Then, the ONLY thing to do here is

[Anonymous Coward]

Coren22 goes silent! "Another one bites the dust" vs. apk as always!

Dear "ConcernedUser"

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't go the way you want. Program's still hosted there (you fail and joke's on you as always. You're weak and a deceitful whimp. The people from the company concerned saw right through your bullshit worm.

Dear "ConcernedUser"

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't go the way you want. Program's still hosted there (you fail and joke's on you as always. You're weak and a deceitful whimp. The people from the company concerned saw right through your bullshit worm). Hahahahahaha!

Dear "ConcernedUser": You FAIL again, lol!

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't go the way you want. Program's still hosted & RECOMMENDED there on MalwareBytes' hpHosts site (you fail & joke's on you as always) http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... - what? You didn't *THINK* I'd see that? WRONG!

Guess what?

LOL - Your sockpuppet stalking me quoted, by ac posts quoted too, is what the people from the company concerned saw right through your bullshit with it worm for your years of ac stalking myself and telling others to do it with you here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... is BACKFIRING ON YOUR DEMENTED DIABETES RIDDEN 1 EYE CYCLOPS ASS!

(Hahahahahaha!)

* Face a fact based on history: AS YOU HAVE FAILED IN LIFE? YOU WILL ALWAYS FAIL vs. me, loser! Always... lol!

( The admin of the MalwareBytes hpHosts site LIKES and RECOMMENDS my program personally - & there is NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, asshole! Nothing... )

APK

P.S.=> Not even a "nice try" you failure in life, failure as a man, + failure in even being the TROLL SCUM you truly evidence yourself to be - you can't "take me down" on my points on hosts files, and the SCUM "likes of you" will NEVER be able to take out my software, fool... apk

Your numerous defeats on DNS vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: LISTED here definitely does http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* You came in here attempting to BERATE me?

(A done nothing of ANY significance in computing worm like you have the NERVE to ask what you have after coming in here trash talking me? LMAO! Give us a break...)

Be thankful I give a nobody like you even a second from MY time of day... you're NOT even worth it since you're a trolling "ne'er-do-well".

APK

P.S.=> You came in here giving ME guff? There's yours back in the link above (all the points you conceded to me on DNS vs. hosts, listed, with the links where you did so... lol!)... apk

Re:Your numerous defeats on DNS vs. hosts

[Ash-Fox]

You came in here attempting to BERATE me?

I didn't attempt, I was sharing my experiences. What surprised me is the idea that you've got some sort of transphobia. I'm guessing you do since you won't answer some simple questions.

you're NOT even worth it since you're a trolling "ne'er-do-well".

I'm not trolling. I asked very simple questions that can be answered just 'yes' or 'no' answers, but you can't seem to manage that even.

Do the math, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

which is how hosts rock for local resolution from RAM

OK, so a malware comes along and contacts a different C&C hostname every second 99.999% of them NXDOMAIN but one day the operator registers the right domain and that last request is the one that tells your computer to wipe its drive. You can defeat that, right? Krebs cracks the bot and comes up with the hash function to turn time -> hostname so you calculate all the hostnames for the next year and add 31536000 x 253-character hostnames to your hosts file (plus a space plus a zero plus a cr plus a lf, that comes out to 257 bytes per hostname) and now your file is 8104752000 bytes larger (~8GB).

The math is done.

P.S.=> YOU can't seem to grasp that once I have a hostname blocked in hosts

And you can't seem to grasp that with 253 characters a domain can contain somewhere around 10^350 hostnames. ".adserver.com" is 13 characters so that gives 1-240 characters a-z0-9-. to make as many hostnames as the ad company wants... except they don't have to do any work. They configure their domain server with "*.adserver.com", and they are done.

But hey, you know what? That's OK. You can keep on blocking google adwords and shitty botnets that don't use a timer to create a new C&C hostname every second. I've got nothing against that. Go forth and be happy!

All I'm offering is the truth. The rabbit hole goes deeper and the red pill will take you there. If you refuse to go deeper, take the blue pill and believe whatever you want.

APK no speek gud lyk mee n u

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG, does APK even KNOW how to English, bra?

I'm not APK! DONT SHOOT!

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand that you are arguing techincals with ol' APK there, but I'm an internet dumbass and your posts and the IETF link you provided sound like Klingon to me. I *think* you are saying that the servers just, somehow, put *.adserver.com and then generate the first part to come up with your 10^350 host names. But can't I do the same thing in my HOSTS file and put *.adserver.com 127.0.0.1 and immediately block those 10^350 names without making an 8GB file? As of right now, I use the MVPS.org hosts.txt but you have to manually update it last I checked. Is there a decent NON-APK program to manage these automagically for me? I use a multilayered approach consisting of ABP, Flashblock, Avast, & MVPS HOSTS for my surfing. NoScript and Ghostery break web 2.0 too much to be useful to me.

Re:I'm not APK! DONT SHOOT!

[Anonymous Coward]

But can't I do the same thing in my HOSTS file

Not in APK's beloved windows, which is what started this whole thread when I suggested he get a job at Microsoft to write a new hosts driver that could do that so his beloved hosts file will still be relevant.

I need a solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you link to your solution please? I am looking for something better than just plain ol HOSTS but I want nothing to do with APK and his retardedness.

Re:I need a solution

[Anonymous Coward]

There isn't one better as far as programs for the hosts file http://start64.com/index.php?o... apk's does 64-bit and 32-bit, and does sped up hardcoded favorites (by reverse DNS pinging). No others do that. You're out of luck.

huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

If he doesn't understand them, then neither do I! If an ad is on my page it IS obtrusive therefore it cannot be unobtrusive. Are you arguing that unobtrusive is not a diametrically opposing word versus advertisement? I guess you win then....except that isn't the common usage of the term anymore. Key examples of oxymorons would be "military intelligence" and "government help".

I just noticed you are modded funny. If that was a joke I still don't get it. whoosh and all that.

truf hurts

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't a feeling....it's reality

HEY APK! Over HERE!

[Anonymous Coward]

APK, Gstoddart said HOSTS were teh ghey and that people who promote them are nerd fags. He specifically said "APK is an ass-fucked nerdfag GayWAD"

You're a LIAR Ash-Fox... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: THIS is not "asking questions" from you http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... liar...

(It was YOU coming in here *trying* to "berate" me... & failing!)

APK

P.S.=> THIS was also the RESULTS of YOUR "better" in DNS vs. HOSTS -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & IT IS NOT 'better':

2.) DNS using excess cpu cycles
3.) DNS using excess memory
4.) DNS using excess I/O
5.) DNS using excess "moving parts" complexity

(#1 - #5 above in comparison to custom hosts files)

6.) DNS having security vulnerabilities that hosts files fix, + that your "fix" against dns redirect poisoning DOUBLES your overheads (using TCP vs. UDP the default) creating yet MORE INEFFICIENCY in your doing so

YOU EVEN CONCEDED THOSE POINTS, QUOTED DOING SO... apk

Re:You're a LIAR Ash-Fox... apk

[Ash-Fox]

(It was YOU coming in here *trying* to "berate" me... & failing!)

I'm sharing my experience, if that berates you, that was a side affect of the original intent. There was no 'trying'.

Hosts do more + smaller memory footprint

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The Admin of hpHosts (owned by MalwareBytes) hosts & recommends my program recommends & hosts it here -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

What've you done better? Zero

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: When I have a hostname blocked in hosts I win, no matter WHAT (care to deny that?).

* Hostnames no longer in use in a botnet PRESENT NO THREAT until they are recycled/reused in fastflux botnets (a definite possibility, they ARE out there, and possibly the most dangerous type).

YES - I get botnet hostnames (even if only eventually) from both my sources, & again, from folks like Gar Warner (his security blog lists them, & that's how I got CryptoLocker covered along with others).

* You fail.

See my subject: ANY IDIOT (you) can "imagine" a scenario but it's GUYS LIKE ME THAT DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT & I have (you haven't).

APK

P.S.=> FACT: As long as I block a particular hostname in hosts, that is in use in a botnet (or not, due to fastflux potential), it is NO threat & if it goes out of use? It is definitely NO THREAT... apk

Re:What've you done better? Zero

[Anonymous Coward]

When I have a hostname blocked in hosts I win

You have A hostname blocked. What are you going to block when *.adserver.com serves up from ALL 10^350 of them? What have you won?

I told you what your options are. It's clear you've chosen the blue pill. You wake up with your head in the sand and believe whatever you want to believe.

DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT & I have (you haven't).

I told you what your options are. YOU are choosing to do nothing about it. Being the first man to run the 5 minute mile was a great achievement, but if that man rests on his laurels, he's passed by the man that can do it in 4.

Your personal attack on me makes it clear that you've taken the blue pill and chosen to hide from the truth. Ignorance is bliss, I hear the bots make juicy and delicious steak. You know nothing at all about me and what I have done or not done. Maybe I'll add wildcard support to systemd. Boy oh boy, that'll bake everyone's noodles, eh? Linux will have better blocking than windows - but only if you get systemd!

The times are changing, either hosts changes with it or hosts dies out. I told you what needs to be done, tick tock tick tock.

You're out of luck

[Anonymous Coward]

None of them do as much as apk's (like hardcoded fav site pings that help against DNS issues for reliability too) and none others do 64-bit from a single 'standalone' executable (they have dependencies on things like SQLite and if that goes bad, you're hurting). APK's is the best hosts file program, hands-down, no questions asked http://start64.com/index.php?o...

I shut all you idiots up easily

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Right here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

By the way: You're replying to slashdot's own transsexual weirdo BarbaraHudson who I spanked on hosts here:

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

You CAN'T prove apk is more like it

[Anonymous Coward]

He runs right over the top of your downmods by reposting unlimitedly when you worms hit & run minusmod him minus justifying why. You can't handle apk with your puny 'weapons' since he nullifies them by going over the top of you again easily since he has no ac limits on posts. Fact is, You can't prove apk wrong is more like it and we all see that http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

Re:You CAN'T prove apk is more like it

[temcat]

Nobody actually needs to prove APK wrong. Spamming is wrong - that's a given and doesn't require any proof.
Where it comes to modding, I personally rarely do it if at all, because it's too much hassle. (Though one of the Troll, Redundant, and Offtopic ratings is always justified for APK, depending on the situation.) I can maybe report spam, because that's what APK's posts are. But now I don't need to do that, either, because... I have to thank APK for one thing: I've recently discovered the joy of reading at a higher compound threshold. This optimal mode allows me to skip his multi-line drivel easily and readily see if some low-scored post is potentially interesting for me.
So have a nice day!

AdBlock's vastly INFERIOR to hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR & 'Souled-Out'

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR to hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR & 'Souled-Out' vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

Why'd you downmod last time I posted this?

[Anonymous Coward]

B.S. I use hosts generated by apk's program. They what apk says for more speed, security, and reliability, better than almost all ads blocked by miles yet hosts use less resources. Beat that with a stick.

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

I asked AdBlock's creator those questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Result? He RAN: W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk

AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit:

http://start64.com/index.php?o...

FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

---

A.) Hosts do more than:

1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

D.) Hosts files yield more:

1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

---

* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

(Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

APK

P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

...apk

Ask yourselves these questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

I asked AdBlock's creator those questions... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

Result? He RAN - W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:

"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"

Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).

I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!

Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!

He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!

ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).

I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!

Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

APK

P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk

Apk said how Coren22: you ran

[Anonymous Coward]

Using port filtering in hosts, server-side even, does it http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... and it silenced you Coren22 rather easily. You can minusmod apk all day as you trolls are doing, doesn't change the fact you can't prove apk wrong on hosts superiority to adblock or ghostery (any browser addon really) for added speed, security, reliability, and even anonymity it yields. No SINGLE addon can do those things as well as hosts OR as efficiently. I've been waiting to see even 1 of you prove him wrong. You can't. You all fail. It's hilarious.

You're not fooling us stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Only way you'd be right is to prove apk wrong validly http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... and it's clear you can't. You downmod him with no valid justification technically and that told me everything I needed to see: You can't prove apk wrong and the "best you've got" is your bullshit downmods. You're losing and only fooling yourself. We see his posts anyway since most of us browse at -1 to see the best posts.

Ash-Fox: Why'd you concede my points then?

[Anonymous Coward]

"You should see what happens when I show APK my DNS solutions are better. He can go on for weeks." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Tuesday February 03, 2015 @08:42PM (#48975515)

So much for your "better" wannabe: DNS has security issues galore + YOU CONCEDED MY POINTS ON DNS ISSUES vs. HOSTS here quoted also stupid -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

"since you won't answer some simple questions." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Thursday February 05, 2015 @02:37AM (#48987087)

You're off topic there, you trolling asshole.

The 1st quote from YOU, where you posted first, above ISN'T "asking questions", it's off topic trolling (which, of course, I made you EAT YOUR WORDS ON in the 2nd link I posted too with you QUOTED no less, doing so... lol!).

APK

P.S.=> You trolls here on /., I've just GOTTA say it: You're worthless in the art & science of computing AND WEAK technically... apk

BarbaraHudson is an online stalker?

[Anonymous Coward]

BarbaraHudson has mental issues stalking apk quoted http://slashdot.org/comments.p... you've been caught quoted doing so in that link with others like Hairyfeet even seconding apk you are scum. Getting a sexchange is also indicative of "mental difficulties" imo also.

BarbaraHudson's breaks laws

[Anonymous Coward]

By harassing + stalking apk http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and she has the nerve to call apk mental etc.? She's an online crackpot!

Low Reputation scumbag? Ok

[Anonymous Coward]

Show us all you've done more, BETTER than I have from a partial list of my favorites only then:

Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61

(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact

PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84 my work is featured there

WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is there

PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83 my work is featured there

CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there

GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000 where my work is in it

HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, again!

It's also been myself helping out the folks at the UltraDefrag64 project (a 64-bit defragger for Windows), in showing them code for how to do Process Priority Control @ the GUI usermode/ring 3/rpl 3 level in their program (good one too), & being credited for it by their lead dev & his team... see here -> http://ultradefrag.sourceforge... or here http://sourceforge.net/tracker...

Which ended up fixing a "bug" for them later, here -> http://sourceforge.net/p/ultra... via its implementation (partially, NOT fully yet as I outline it & use in my applications such as this one -> http://www.start64.com/index.p...

APK

P.S.=> THEN there's this too:

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

The BEST in the antiviruses (MalwareBytes) http://www.av-test.org/en/news... recommend & host it http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

... apk

Attempting to damage someone's career

[Anonymous Coward]

'APK is a know-nothing troll who has never worked in the industry.' by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, 2011 @11:19AM (#35186644) Journal

Is indeed libel Barbara http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and attempting to organize a conspiracy of harassment and stalking online is another crime on your part you have just admitted BarbaraHudson. Where did apk ever state he could completely secure a computer using hosts files only, BarbaraHudson?

Re:Attempting to damage someone's career

[BarbaraHudson]

I will violate my rule of not engaging directly with APK on this one.

The challenge

1. You threatened to sue me for libel on several occasions.

2. I told you to have your lawyer contact me and I will arrange to receive service.

3. **crickets**

You keep threatening to sue people for libel, people keep saying "Ok, see you in court", and you ALWAYS back down. Coward. And then you wonder why people don't take you seriously? So, the challenge is simple - show us ONE example of where you've successfully sued somebody - anybody - for libel.

But you're good for a laugh. *POKE* *POKE*.

BarbaraHudson this isn't damaging his rep?

[Anonymous Coward]

'APK is 44 years old and really does live still with one or both of his parents (or another relative); APK can't write software for shit;' Journal by tomhudson on Monday May 17, 2010 @09:47AM from http://slashdot.org/journal/25...

See subject BarbaraHudson: Neither is true. That's libel from you. He's done this in software recently, and it's done well, have you? From apk's posts:

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

You ran from my challenge loser

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you shot your mouth off trolling me, prove me wrong (especially on hosts asshole):

"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

Where? You RAN from trying recently -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & you're FAIRLY given the opportunity to make good on those words of yours - you downmodded (via your many sockpuppets) & ran, lol, after your wise-ass comment on hosts here JUST before that challenge -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... quoted next below:

---

"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644)

Where did I even *once* claim hosts completely secure a computer? Hosts are, however, the BEST single tool for more speed, security, reliability, & more. Prove otherwise.

Putting words in my mouth I never stated != truth, or a good argument on YOUR part. You RAN from that too!

---

"Who has independently vetted it?" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255)

You tried to say it's malware/spyware too - guess what:

Answer = The BEST in the security antimalware & antispyware business currently, http://www.av-test.org/en/news... per that VERY recent test's results, who also host & RECOMMEND my program for hosts, is who -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... (Malwarebytes' hpHosts)

* You've done better? No... lol!

APK

P.S.=> You fail: "Eat your words, Forrest" & you told others to stalk/harass me by ac posts as YOU YOURSELF do, unceasingly, for years http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

... apk

Why won't you answer my question

[Anonymous Coward]

Where'd APK ever say he can totally secure computer w\ hosts? You won't engage apk directly because from what I see above here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... you haven't done as well as he has despite you calling him a know nothing that never worked in the industry. That is indeed an attempt to harm his reputation professionally and as I said earlier also, your admission of an attempt to organize a conspiracy of stalking and harassment is indeed another crime. I'd cut it out BarbaraHudson. If it ever came down to it, you'd be in trouble!

Ask BarbaraHudson why she won't answer mine

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apk can't write software for shit" Barb: You've done better? http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

You're not worth anything

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't get blood from a stone that sits on forums all day, has no job or wealt, and is a penniless diseased sick individual who likes to stalk/harass others on forums, like Tom/BarbaraHudson the estrogen mentally imbalanced tranny psycho (you) does to me since 2010? Please.

APK

P.S.=> Priceless: Watching you *try* to "bullshit" everyone "you won't directly interact with apk" in proving my points on hosts wrong (you can't or you would have by now)

OR

Showing us you've done more & better than I have from a partial list of my achievements ONLY.

Why do you avoid it, trying to bullshit us?

LOL - Again - You can't, I know it, YOU KNOW IT, heck - everyone reading does!

The truth is, I make you "EAT YOUR WORDS" everytime - shouldn't have said "APK is a know nothing that never worked in the industry" back in 2010 since everytime you TRY prove that? You end up with egg on your face...apk

BS: ModBombing is bullshit so I beat it

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: I post again over unjust modbombers, that's all. None of you can stop it either, unless you STOP your bullshit downmods!

Want to downmod me?

Do it justly: Prove my points WRONG beyond any doubt with backing substantiating documentation!

(THEN, you'd have made a VALID point)

* Otherwise? You're full of SHIT, and you KNOW it...

APK

P.S.=> Funny how NOBODY *ever* validly proves my points wrong on how hosts give users more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity to a lesser extent, eh? Not! All they have is BOGUS downmods, nothing more... apk

2+2=4 posted all over is spam, too

[temcat]

At least the Troll, Redundant, and Offtopic ratings have nothing to do with whether your points are right or wrong per se. So your spam gets rightly downmodded for what it is. I guess it's indeed hard to stop within the existing rules when somebody has no life and devotes all his time to spamming the comments with the same shit in the same obnoxious manner. But, as I said, I don't even need that now - you can feel free to continue your heroic but pointless fight, and it won't inconvenience me as all I'll ever see will be a single line with a small grey-colored bit of your boring diatribe. Still a waste of a line, of course, but the world is not perfect. Which apparently you have trouble getting over.

Prove me wrong then temcat

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: Nobody proves these wrong http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

Go away with your cries of the DEFEATED Advertiser, malware maker, botnet herder, webmaster, or INFERIOR COMPETITOR... ok?

Bogus downmods do *NOT* cut it validly...

APK

P.S.=> The day *ANY* of you dolts (from that list above) can validly PROVE ALL OF MY POINTS WRONG, is the day you have a solid REAL point - until then? You FAIL - you know it, I KNOW IT, & so does anyone else reading... apk

AdBlock's INFERIOR crap vs. hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

Can ghostery/adblock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
11.) Get you past a dnsbl
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

* "?"

APK

P.S.=> ANSWER ="NO" to each above on Ghostery/AdBlock doing it as well or at all!

BOTH do far less than hosts do & less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

Ghostery's Advertiser owned - "A fox guards the henhouse"-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

Both add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

For the BEST hosts file?

APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

... apk

If I block domains from a botnet in hosts

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject: I win no matter what you say. I get them all (even if only eventually).

* You can TRY to post 'days or weeks later' & guess what? I'll still see it and put you in your place, dumbo.

APK

P.S.=> Time can go to its ending & that'll still be true no matter what you say, fool... apk

Malware? Not when these folks host it

[Anonymous Coward]

MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

* They know what's "malware" far better than a /. dunce like you does, that's certain...

APK

Keep wasting your modpoints

[Anonymous Coward]

He posts again after you downmod & you can't prove him wrong. Must be awful going thru life being a failure like you at anything you do.

Aw, gee: Wally whimp's outta modpoints

[Anonymous Coward]

If ya didn't downmod him 1st time vs proving him wrong he wouldn't repost wally. Yer wally-weapons are useless vs. apk and it's become blatantly obvious you can't touch a single point of his from his list of how hosts beat the shit outta the crap you use, dimwit.

Funny I had to correct you on dnscache stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

DNS = more power & resource consumption than hosts, adding on more complexity + room for breakdown & CERTAINLY EXPLOIT (dns redirect poisoning, amplification attacks, dynamic DNS using botnets, etc.)

* YOU, like the transsexual weirdo Tom/BarbaraHudson, are MORE THAN WELCOME to prove EVERY POINT OF MINE here, wrong -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

(Which of course, you CAN'T DO, since YOU have FAILED HUGELY @ it before Ash-Fox -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... where a DUMB SHIT LIKE YOU DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THE STUPID MISTAKE YOU MADE WAS CORRECTABLE for hosts & how to do it - cut usermode slow & defective dnscache clientside service in Windows... lol! )

APK

P.S.=> Hosts get you past DNS issues, actually complimenting DNS by lightening its request loads (admins of DNS should love hosts files users for that), & shoring up those security issues it has UNTIL THE FOOLS WHO BUILT THAT SHREDDED SECURITY ISSUE WRECK FINALLY GET SMART & FIX IT TOTALLY... apk

Better question you RAN from 3x now Dave420

[Anonymous Coward]

Can adblock do as much as hosts & more efficiently? NO -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

* :)

YOU FAIL (especially seeing you UNJUSTIFIABLY downmod this post last 3 times I posted it here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... & here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... + here DAYS LATER thinking I wouldn't catch it (wrong) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... since you're CLEARLY UNABLE TO PROVE MY POINTS WRONG VALIDLY & TECHNICALLY on the superiority of hosts vs. ANY single other "so-called 'solution' - especially "Almost ALL Ads Blocked", lol)

Downmods don't cut it - We see my points anyhow (for most of us browsing below the level of 0 which you are *trying* vainly to "hide" my posts with your bogus downmods - I'll run you DRY of them, & then what'll you have? EGG ON YOUR FACE, & running, & that's about it!)

APK

P.S.=> As always, you fail, lol (so does "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" vs. hosts, bigtime)... apk

Coren22 you were asked a question

[Anonymous Coward]

Can AdBlock help (hosts do) vs. DNS issues? No http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and YOU RAN boy... lol!

* SCORE APK 16, Coren 22 1 (at least YOU got 1 which I only recently took a small risk on & put up, which YES, my solution WOULD BLOCK THE ATTACK, but unfortunately would also stall DNS communique too - SO I GRACIOUSLY took it down anyhow, & YOU? Still "way, Way, WAY FAR BEHIND"... lmao!)

Wannabes like you? Make me laugh... menial networking TROLLS that are HELPLESS minus guys like ME creating the tools simpleton failures in computing vs. coders like myself create for YOU to merely USE, user with a better password!

APK

P.S.=> YOU RAN, beyotch... apk

You seriously can't prove apk wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

Technically unjustifiable downmods only made apk look good here http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...