Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Research Paper Considers Serving Web-ads From Localhost
An anonymous reader writes: A paper from Microsoft researchers (PDF) posits the possibility of 'pushing' web ads to a user's own computer and serving them into pre-arranged containers on web pages, with the EFF or ACLU serving as privacy mediators between the user and the advertisers who want to engage them. However the framework — dubbed 'Privad' — would need to get installed on the user's system by the same familiar means which the likes of Superfish use. The report admits that Privad would probably need to be disseminated "through adware-style software bundling, shopping discounts, toolbars or other incentives."
Localhost is my home. You DO NOT touch my home.
No. No. No. No. No. Definitely No. Nope. Don't Even. No. Lets not, and say we did.
In the event of nope, just no. Absolutely not. So, as you can see, NO.
Sincerely,
No@nope.com
This idea will be received with open arms, here on /., I'm sure.
I'm somewhat worried (absolutely petrified, I should say) about the effort spent on advertisements. I guess considering human nature it is a necessary evil, but still...
Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
We'll see how long it takes us before we remove/block this "feature"
"Channels" on your desktop, back in the IE4/Win98 days!
NEVER FORGET THE STARING MICKEY MOUSE AND TAZ
Wow. Thanks /.'s Timothy for your editing work.
After all the years we're used to your frequent grammar issues.
But incorrect markup with raw URLs like that, that's an impressive low.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
More like, "From the Microsoft Marketing Department." Unless I'm missing something, this is just bundling "safe" adware as part of Windows. Hmm, maybe Ubuntu will have new life breathed into it.
Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
Privy(outhouse) + ad (derived from)
love is just extroverted narcissism
Privad would probably need to be disseminated "through adware-style software bundling, shopping discounts, toolbars or other incentives."
Given what MS just did with the Ask toolbar, it looks like the Ad Wars are starting.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
The GOATSE is coming from INSIDE YOUR HOUSE!!
{#`%${%&`+'${`%&NO CARRIER
There's the evil empire I grew up with! I was wondering where they'd gotten off to.
Is it compatible with AdBlock?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
This could be the best thing since Steve Balmer got rid of the start button. How to truly bring about Apple and Linux global domination.
It's the competition.
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Not to start a Platform War; but this is something you will NEVER see Apple do. Not because they don't like making money; but because that simply isn't their business model (iAds notwithstanding). And besides, Apple is trying to distinguish themselves from virtually everyone else by making it very clear that they don't play the "Selling Personal Information By the Pound" (with apologies to Genesis) game.
Are they paying for the bandwidth of mine that I pay for and they are wasting?
One of Microsoft's licensing tiers for Windows 8 was free, but OEMs were forced to set the default homepage and search engine to Bing. This sounds like the adware equivalent. I'm not sure how they'll implement it, since Windows 10 licenses are going to be free for upgraders.
Here's something interesting to think about though. Unlike the rabid-anti advertising folks, I don't really do much on my own systems to avoid ads. I really don't like them, but I'm content with ignoring them simply because I don't want to spend the effort to install ad blockers or change HOSTS files. If someone like me, who could do all this stuff, chooses not to do so because I have more important things to do...then what will your average consumer do? Given this, it seems like it could have some traction. Serving up ads from localhost, and therefore having at least some access to the local machine might be where I would draw the line and start the blocking.
Oh, and to the person who mentioned Internet Explorer 4.x "channels" on Win98...thanks for the horrible flashbacks to the Mickey Mouse and Taz. :-)
Class action.
I hope it's in the billions.
I come here for the love
"The report admits that Privad would probably need to be disseminated 'through adware-style software bundling, shopping discounts, toolbars or other incentives.' " ... or the OS!
Why are we discussing this paper from 2009 (http://conferences.sigcomm.org/hotnets/2009/program.html) as if it is new?
So basically this is your bullshit way of monetizing our desktops directly and preventing us from using ad blockers?
Fuck you, it's our desktop, we own it. It's not there for you assholes to monetize it and fill it up with advertising shit.
God but the people who sell ads are self entitled assholes.
Placing the ads on our machines directly is a bullshit move. How about we protect our fucking privacy by not having this shit on our machines in the first place.
Assholes.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
HTTPS should be truly end to end with no MITM. Any software vendor putting stuff on my computer that bypasses this will not be supported by me financially in the future.
To be perfectly honest, I'm so strongly in favor of encrypting everything that I say, if there's a non-HTTPS site out there that only serves traffic over HTTP, and they want to bundle malware on my system that *only* injects content into regular HTTP (not HTTPS) connections, I'm all for it. Go ahead and punish users and sites that run without TLS enabled. It'll just increase the pressure on webmasters and users to get TLS up and running on absolutely every host.
And with things like StartSSL and soon that Mozilla-funded free CA, there's really no excuse not to have a trusted cert (not a self-signed or snakeoil cert).
Let's encrypt the web. But don't you dare interfere with or modify my HTTPS traffic through any means. That will immediately get your company blacklisted in my book of companies I'm willing to do business with.
Speaking of ads, why in the higgidy heck and I seeing full page splash ads on the home page?!
As long as it REPLACES all of those linked web adds AND its source code is vetted by independent parties (EFF, ACLU, etc) for privacy/safety sign me up. The current nightmare of interdependent web pages displaying third party advertisements some of which are hosting adware/malware needs to be curtailed. The fact that it is coming from M$ is a bit of a concern but that doesn't necessarily negate its usefulness, especially if a close eye is kept on it.
That means I'll have to block localhost in the hostfile.* *(I know that's impossible )
Ads stuffed into my machine, but also prevetted by the ACLU and EFF? How high do you think we are?
Not only do you want to suck up my bandwidth, you want to suck up my drive space. And only those ads deemed 'acceptable'?
Didn't we go through that whole push thing about 1998 or so. Hell, you even got free dialup if you accepted their pushed ads. Of course, it rendered the machine unusable, because it was trying to keep up with the ads stream...
Oh man, APK's head is going to asplode!
Why? Don't you miss those screens full off highly functional toolbars? With 4K+ resolution monitors, we should be able to pack a few hundred more in IE (or whatever it's called today).
Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
Given local storage extensions supported by most browsers these days advertisers don't need to install anything to pull this off. They have all the tools to do it right now.
*standing ovation for a brilliant bit of fact-finding* My kingdom for mod points!
Yeah I think you are spot-on. They are exploring ways to generate revenue without charging for the OS.
love is just extroverted narcissism
I'm surprised that when the screen aspect ratio changed from 4:3, they didn't push for a portrait layout to be default. Would have been plenty of room for toolbars that way.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
hint--
They still have to download those ads to your computer from somewhere...
APK solution STILL relevant
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
... Sort of. I have a giant ad-blocking /etc/hosts file, and since I actually run httpd on all of my Macs, I often see my own 404 page in an iframe on sites I visit. So, yeah, works for me. :D
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
I have been wanting to see Apple or Microsoft or Netflix embrace torrent like local servers. But not for ads. For movies. Just push out all the movies to people's computers at night. Then let itunes or whoever form the torrent networks to deliver movies to paying customers. As long as I get a discount (since it's my bandwidth and electricity) why not? I'd like it as thumb in the nose of comcast and anyone else throttling the net.
I'm not talking about illegal file sharing, I'm talking about just having content served right within Comcasts own network so there's no peering issues.
Yes I appreciate how long comcast would let that go on. Just a fantasy.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
A good advertisement is one served to the correct audience. For example, if you are a single man, an ad for feminine hygiene products is unlikely to be good. Therefore some measure of targeting is required.
Saikat Guha, Alexey Reznichenko, Kevin Tang, Hamed Haddadi, Paul Francis
Max Planck Institute for Software Systems and Cornell University
sguha@mpi-sws.org
areznich@mpi-sws.org
hamed@mpi-sws.org
francis@mpi-sws.org
kt258@cornell.edu
Wouldn't that be a "Trespass to Chattels", due to their storing their stuff on your property, thus depriving you of use of said property? (That is, permanently, not in a browser cache.)
IANAL.
"So it is with some interest that I came across today some research by Saikat Guha, a Senior Scientist at Raytheon BBN Technologies and a partner at Microsoft Research, which investigates the feasibility of running web ads from localhost – from the user’s own computer."
This isn't an MS-sponsored paper. It's Saikat Guha, Alexey Reznichenko, Kevin Tang, Hamed Haddadi, and Paul Francis looking to make a few bucks.
...A paper from Microsoft researchers posits the possibility of 'pushing' web ads to a user's own computer and serving them into pre-arranged containers on web pages...
So this is what Microsoft meant when they said Windows would become a service. Microsoft just neglected to mention who would be of benefit from this service --- the advertisers.
i miss scamming the fuck out of alladvantage in the late 90's. Yes of course I had 55 of those tool bars open, and yes i certainly did click on the ads.
And the author was a postdoc at the Max Planck Institute at the time! Nothing to do with Microsoft!
Microsoft could offer a means for you to buy back the ad space on these pages by acting as an advertiser on your own machine. It would be Microsoft's counterpart to Google Contributor, which is in private beta. Would you be willing to pay more for a copy of Windows that includes this?
I do'na know what they call this where's ya from but here We call this kind of thing trespassing! It's bad enough that you insist on running all this Java Script stuff, but now you want to store stuff locally so you can better control what popup boxes I see and be a light'n the load on ya end yonder? No sir, I'm done being nice and putt'n up with ya. You can take ya North West sourced, high wheeling fancy software and the low down good for nothn snake oil sellin' business off my property afor' I be calling the law. There will be no billboards bein' built on a my stake, a'n'a I won't be buy'n no truck I'sa see's ya try'n to sell that way. No sir, not gona be buy'n nothing.
Now, I'm gona warn ya fella, if I see you, ya friends or any of your varmints trespassing on ma property after today, I'm a gona shoot first with this here six shooter. Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot a-gin, and if'n ya still breathin I might be asking questions, or I might just shoot so'more depen'n on how mean I'm a feelin' and how I'm stocked for ammo at da-time. Ya either gon' be dead, or wish'n ya already was...
Now shoo, ya lazy good for nothing, free loading, yella pond scum. If'n I'm still see'n ya face once I get to count'n to ten, I'm a gona be count'n six more as I be pullin' the trigger. Ya' here me clear? (Click) All ya'll be going now, mind ya mannors as ya be on the trail. Make sure on close'n the gates ya open on the way home to Redmond or I'll be making sure ya learn ya manors..
A one........ (Mississippi)..... A Two .... (Mississippi)........
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
And with things like StartSSL and soon that Mozilla-funded free CA, there's really no excuse not to have a trusted cert (not a self-signed or snakeoil cert).
Even if the StartSSL certificate is available without charge, it doesn't renew automatically. So there's still the manual task of remembering to renew it every year, which in some cases involves opening a trouble ticket with your web host to get the certificate installed. There's also usually an extra charge for a dedicated IP if you still have viewers who use SNI-ignorant browsers such as Internet Explorer on Windows XP or Android Browser on Gingerbread.
Have gnu, will travel.
Won't work for me! I redirect localhost to 127.0.0.1!
BTW...why are we discussing a paper from 2009? Is this really news?
I'm always interested in enhanced browsing and shopping experiences.
I would be sure to send Comcast a monthly bill for using drive space on my computers too.
I mean, let's look at it from the other side. Might it not make ad-blocking easier?
In the browser, ad-blockers would just have to block anything coming from localhost; except in rare occasions (web-developers, etc). it is unlikely that any other web-material will be served from there. Rather than having to keep track of an increasingly byzantine list of adservers, the Adblock app would just have to stop the ads coming from one source.
Of course, blocking it on the browser only keeps you from seeing it; if you want to prevent any communications (to /and/ from the advertisers) you'll still want to prevent communications between your computer and the advertisers. But if this data is being run through and vettted by Microsoft, it should be fairly simple (or at least less complicated than current methods) to block certain IPs at the firewall or even prevent certain executables from running at all.
Unchecked, its a horrific violation of privacy... but with the proper tools it might make managing advertisments much easier. Maybe? Any thoughts?
What's the host file solution to Mr Clippy living in localhost?
For those of you not reading Slashdot {...} ads appear {...}
What ads ?
I have both
- uBlock running
- and the Thanks again for helping make Slashdot great! box checked.
Sorry, I pay for my bandwidth, I don't want my money wasted on annoying flashing things trying to persuade me to throw money on goods that I don't give a fuck about (in addition to disrupting the flow and making the overall internet experience shitty).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Note that it the meaning is still correct in topology, and the original meaning of the word when the english borrowed it from the french, before its meaning drifted appart.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Metro apps have ads built in - the provided Weather app has a block ad permanently lodged between the hourly forecast and the radar maps, for example. This has nothing to do with the web, the browser, or slashdot.
You deleted all the relevant bits of the post to make a non-point about some random ad blocker that would have no effect.
John