Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chrome To Freeze Flash Ads On Sight From September 1

Posted by Soulskill on from the making-the-internet-less-obnoxious dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Shaun Nichols from the Register reports that unimportant Flash content will be click-to-play by default in Google Chrome from September 1. He writes, "Google is making good on its promise to strangle Adobe Flash's ability to auto-play in Chrome. The web giant has set September 1, 2015 as the date from which non-important Flash files will be click-to-play in the browser by default – effectively freezing out 'many' Flash ads in the process. Netizens can right-click over the security-challenged plugin and select 'Run this' if they want to unfreeze an ad. Otherwise, the Flash files will remain suspended in a grey box, unable to cause any harm nor any annoyance."

11 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. I've had this as a plug-in. by Ecuador · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hmm, I've had this as a plug-in for a while now (FF though). It interfered a bit with some sites, but it was the fault of those sites anyway, so I guess it is a good idea to have it built-in in the browser (it can work even better than a plugin)

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:I've had this as a plug-in. by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...except that google gets to decide which adverts are played and which aren't.

      I'm betting Google's own dancing monkeys will be as annoying as ever.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:I've had this as a plug-in. by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 5, Insightful

      no, this will stop only what chrome deems unnecessary. not everything.

      now how about those damn autoplaying youtube videos? flash or no flash, they still autoplay and then play the next one, next one, next one, etc..

    3. Re:I've had this as a plug-in. by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm assuming HTML5 graphics and videos will still play, so if it's limited to just Flash, so what?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:I've had this as a plug-in. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm assuming HTML5 graphics and videos will still play, so if it's limited to just Flash, so what?

      So what? It'll stop all drive-by Flash malware. cf. the AOL (advertising.com) attack vectors that are such a problem right now.

      Amazon is refusing Flash ads on its CDN on the same day.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    5. Re:I've had this as a plug-in. by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the real point here is that the big guys have finally decided Flash must die.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    6. Re:I've had this as a plug-in. by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the sad part? So many here will cheer when HTML V5 video is worse in every metric than Flash by a country mile!

      Uses more resources? Yep, both CPU cycles and memory, just compare Flash/VP8 to HTML V5 H.264 of the same quality and you'll find its a pig. they try to hide how big a hog it is by offloading to the GPU but guess what? GPU cycles don't grow on tress and all that extra power sucking will equal much quicker battery drain.

      Has less features? Yep again, when it comes to animation and gaming HTML V5 isn't anywhere as good as Flash, despite it being in development for...what? The better part of a decade?

      And finally the rotting elephant in the room...DRM. Adobe not only has always allowed any format to be put in a flash container but they also have had zero problems with people redistributing Flash or even producing a FOSS option in Gnash. Compare this to HTML V5 which thanks to APPL and MSFT is tied to H.264, a format owned by one of the nastiest patent trolls on the planet. Anybody think they are gonna let FOSS OSes add support without cutting them a check?

      I'm all for replacing flash but it should be with something BETTER, what we are getting with HTML V5 is practically a wish list written by APPL and MSFT to help their position. think APPL wants HTML V5 to be great for animation and gaming and possibly compete with their appstore? Think MSFT wants a video format that doesn't have a patent tollbooth for any possible competition?

      So if you want to replace Flash? Then replace it with something BETTER, with more features, more open formats, less resource usage. What we are doing is replacing one bad idea for another and that isn't progress to me.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Re:Do we really want Google... by SeriousTube · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's silly. It's click to play, not a total block.

  3. non-important? by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Basically, "essential" Flash content (such as embedded video players) are allowed to automatically run, while non-essential Flash content, much of that being advertisements, will be automatically paused.

    So.... queue adverts posing as video players in 3. ... 2...... 1......

    Why can't they stop the autoplay of ALL content.

    1. Re:non-important? by laie_techie · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exactly. Autoplay of HTML5 video is a real pain, and one of the more noxious ways modern advertisers try to shove their content down our throats. Modern advertising really is the haunt of sociopaths.

      There are ways to stop autoplay for Chrome and Firefox.

  4. Re:Do we really want Google... by Kiwikwi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Like it or not, all the major browsers are phasing out plugin support. Microsoft and Chrome has already dropped support for plugins other than Flash, and Mozilla is about to do the same. Flash gets special treatment due to its market share, but make no mistake, the browser manufacturers are looking to kill it as soon as reasonably possible, too.