Slashdot Mirror
German Publisher Axel Springer Bans Adblocking Users From Bild Website (axelspringer.de)
An anonymous reader writes: Major European publishing house Axel Springer has instituted countermeasures against users who employ adblocking software on its Bild news outlet, which represents a daily publication with a print circulation of 2.5 million. The website now presents readers with a request to either turn off the adblocking or pay a €2.99 monthly subscription fee. In a statement the company insists that online journalism must be funded by one of the 'two known revenue pillars' — advertising or sales.
It's why I don't use ad blocking software or disable ads on Slashdot.
++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
Bild is crap "journalism" anyway.
Viruses not so much. Way too much of that going around to make it safe to browse without adblocking - too many ad carriers do not audit the ads that are displayed, leading to all sorts of click bait and virus crap being displayed.
If a site is important enough to me, I'll pay a nominal fee rather than slow loading times with what is often intrusive hogwash.
If it's not, the information I seek is probably available elsewhere.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Sure, revenue must come from somewhere, but, what happens when your product doesn't worth what you ask for it and you're not willing to compromise your privacy with third parties that do whatever they want with it?.
Bild is the worst example of German yellow press. I seriously doubt that people who are intelligent enough to install an ad blocker would read bild.de anyway.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
If you pay your money for a subscription - does that mean you can then disable your ad blocker and not have ads served to you? Call me a cynic - but I bet they still try and bombard you with visual spam.
Actually that seems quite reasonable. At least they give you the choice. I don't like sites that say "you can't view this site with adblock", but with a choice and a reasonable monthly charge for add-free use I'd be happy with it. If it was a site that I used a lot I'd probably pay the subscription. If I decided that I did not use it enough to justify that at least I wouldn't have the feeling that the ads were being forced on me.
It seems that the news industry believes we cannot do without them, and that we must pay for the privilege of keeping them in business.
It's quite hysterical. They're in for a big surprise.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
As long as I can also block the request to turn off the ad blocker, so it looks as if the site is simply dysfunctional, I'm fine with that. I'm even fine with blocking the whole domain. Bild is the worst "newspaper" one could imagine, it's certainly not a loss for anyone.
When there are millions of "news sites" for free, some without ads too! I hope their customers don't cave and set a terrible precedent.
Would it be possible to create an adblocker that loads all the ads but replaces them with beige squares just before they hit the framebuffer? Or would the latest JavaShit technology still be able to detect these?
What they do has little in common with journalism. They even ran an extensive ad campaign, labelling themselves as lowbrow entertainment instead of a newspaper based on journalism. Of course they have the right to ask for money.
I would love to see a company that would:
1.Allow customers to make a single monthly payment, which would be distributed among participating websites according to some metric like pageviews or time-on-site
2.Force participating websites to commit to a no-ads policy in order to participate in the revenue
What will probably happen is that paid subscribers will continue to be served ads, especially from "acceptable" publishers.
Block all ads and block adblock-detecting scripts. Two can play this game.
The problem here, is these venues view themselves as novel, very important and irreplaceable. This may have been true when the newsstand and town crier were one of a very few outlets for news. If I find your advertising policies objectionable, your competitors or the Pirate Bay are nothing more than a click away. So instead of keeping me on your page, you have pushed me away, into a nearly infinite number of news websites that don't treat me a product worthy of contempt.
If a site is up to make money then it has one of three options, 1 Ads,2 Selling your personal data, or 3 subscriptions. No-one really likes any of them but the trouble is that option 3 just sends people running in the opposite direction.
In a cybernetic fit of rage she pissed off to another age...
I somehow doubt they actually get 2.99 euros in ad revenue per reader per month so as to make this a fair exchange. More like 0.10, maybe?
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Dear publisher: Fuck you. I'm happy with either paying for journalism or viewing YOUR ads. I'm not going to allow your web site to shove somebody else's ads in my face. If you want to sell ads, then sell ads. Including some piece of code from an ad wholesaler isn't going to fly, in the same way I wouldn't accept an unknown package wrapped in brown paper from other random people trying to sell me shit along with my paper newspaper or paper magazine.
Sell your own ads, publishers. That's part of your job. If you can't be bothered to do that, then I can't be bothered to help you get paid.
I don't respond to AC's.
...using NoScript. And Bild.de will open up with no problems even if you use adblockers. The website was designed by world class cretins. After all, it's the german equivalent of People or TMZ.
If anyone cares, disabling javascript gets your your crappy news, even with adblock.
Their adblock detector gets tripped by the tracking protection for Private Mode in Firefox Beta, even if *no adblock is installed*.
This is *not* about ads. It's about tracking.
And thus immoral.
The site is still working just fine for me. I use AdBlock, AdBlock Plus, Ghostery and ScriptBlock.
Provide me with an advertising framework that doesn't obfuscate content, track my private purchasing / browsing habits and deliver viruses and I'll see no need to block them.
(Btw, just accessed it for testing, out of curiosity, not for reading the yellow news...)
Dear Advertisers,
We had a social contract. In exchange for our attention, you agreed to fund our entertainment. But you squandered that agreement and broke our contract. Simply getting our attention wasn't enough for you. In your zeal to make your ads stand out over the others, you started using insecure technologies that exposed your customers to attack. When you realized that your customers were commodities to be bought and sold, you tried to monetize us. You started using tracking cookies. You sold us to your friends and partners. You violated our trust. And now you're asking us to trust you again but you haven't done a single thing to earn that trust back. Quite the contrary, in fact, you continue to abuse us over and over.
Advertisers, you have asked us to return to the old model but have given us no reason to do so. I will continue to block your ads and your malignant tumors until you have proven without a shadow of a doubt that you have mended your ways. Until then, SCREW YOU.
Sincerely,
Your former customers
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
What happens when the internet pay model really does shift to a utility and we pay per kb? What about mobile users who aren't on wifi?
I would think people will start going after sites for forcing people to download extraneous content that wasn't what they agreed to and wasn't what they were looking for. IE Ads. After a time you could really start counting up the dollars spent on your internet bill. I didn't ask for it, and I'm expected to pay.
Additionally, who actually thinks these things work? Even with all the "targeted" ads I really never feel like I'm being persuaded by ads. I feel like this entire portion of business is extremely over-rated. Anyone else actually... I don't know, buy things because of an ad?
What took you so long to start spamming us? Seriously... Just FOAD already. I'd rather see a post from Bennett Haselton than deal with your abuse of the AC posting system here. This community doesn't give a shit about your crapware. If they did, you'd have a major increase in your crapware user base.
looks like it fails to detect the use of noscript ;)
And nothing of value was lost.
So does that mean that the company is going to take full responsibility for the malware they spread through ads? I thought not.
Their ad blocker banner requires JavaScript. Running NoScript circumvents it.
Works fine for me with uMatrix. Of course I don't know German that well, so...
Trolling is a art,
Are they actually blocking, or are they putting up a stupid DIV overlay which you can defeat in a hot millisecond?
We all have different reasons why to use adblocker - historically it was we didn't want to see ads or they made the viewing experience slower, and now malware.
And of course the content owner needs to pay the bills.
Previously many sites didn't have the option to allow viewers to pay a subscription fee. This seems completely fair trade. Another model is "pay what you want" (kind of the Public Radio/TV model in the USA).
Remember when all the browsers added pop-up blockers to their software? It was because the ads were too aggressive and hurt the user experience.
So go cry me a river since advertisers have only gotten worse about annoying ads blocking content.
Blocking people who have ad-blockers won't make them turn it off or pay up. They'll leave your crummy site for another one instead.
Who give a rat's ass. They will lose readership and think that it doesn't matter because 'they weren't seeing the ads anyway'.
But the knock on effect is that their uniques will be declining as well. It will become harder attracting advertisers when your uniques are baseless lies.
People seem to forget that the web was free to begin with. Free access to free content that was free of ads or any other monetization. That companies figured out how to monetize that free content was a massive annoyance, from day one. There was all this talk about microtransactions, paying fractions of a cent for content, blah blah blah. Well, now people are so sick of the ads that they are fighting back. If you don't want to offer free content, that's your prerogative, but people aren't going to be lured to your site with the promise of free content when they have to suffer a barrage of ads and highly undesirable content.
You can do whatever you want. But, if you want to survive, you need to realize that people are sick of your shit. They are sick of ads. The frequency, the volume, the trickery. They are sick of low grade content. They are sick of paying for content AND then being further monetized by ads with blatant lies about keeping content costs low. See cable television.
There's a reason why the richest ad company in the world is building self driving cars, of all things. The days of easy money from ads mercifully is coming to an end. People will continue to adblock, timeshift/skip ads on television etc. The media companies have gone too far and there will now be a correction.
I for one welcome the day that shit-posting can't make you money.
I've been seeing more requests than ever recently to "please turn off Adblocker" while browsing.
I see the same thing and my response is basically that I'll turn it off when I am paid in cash to view the add AND all tracking data is provided to me for review and possible veto. Until then they can go perform sexual acts on themselves. Their bad business model is not my problem.
If a site is important enough to me, I'll pay a nominal fee rather than slow loading times with what is often intrusive hogwash.
Exactly. I do subscribe to a few sites that I find particularly valuable to me. The rest of them aren't valuable enough for me to worry about. If they paywall it off then I'll just go elsewhere but they aren't getting a penny from me, directly or indirectly. I'm certainly not paying for something (including in the form of personal info) before I've had a chance to evaluate the site and I never once agreed to view the ads or have my activities tracked.
I read somewhere that nag screens like http://blockadblock.com/ on average get about 35% of the adblocked traffic to whitelist. I'm not sure if it's different for major media, but 35% recovery is nothing to sneeze at.
In general it seems like a better strategy, because it won't drive users away entirely and those users might still share on social media.
As long as when you pay the fee, THEY remove the ads - and any tracking.
Last time I went to the Bild website, the content wasn't worth 3€/month. But that was a couple of years back. Maybe they've changed in the mean time...
Fires up one of the secondary browsers sans adblock, goes to website.
Still a lot of sport, boobs (americans might loose an eye if staring too long at it - deffers NSFW) and celebrity gossip.
Nope. I guess there's more pressing problems in the world I need to read about in the limited time that I have. I guess I'll not subscribe.
Perhaps what is needed is a new form of adblock, which actually loads the ads, possibly on a low priority basis*, but doesn't display them.
*Thinking along the lines of accept the first 1k of the ad, then go slow on the TCP responses, until the main-page/non-ad-identified bits have finished. I am looking for a system such that the ads are downloading to /dev/null while I am reading the ad-free page.
Of course the negative response to that will be to put some active content in the ad such that the article will not display until the ad "payload" is actively processed and phones home. Thus blurring the line between ads and malware even more than it is already. (at times)
(If someone is already doing this sort of thing, please don't flame me, just inform. Frankly, although I used to maintain block lists, etc., I gave up years ago. Well not completely; I do attempt to avoid certain publishers, but that is on a more manual basis rather than automated.)
McFly777
- - -
"What do people mean when they say the computer went down on them?" -Marilyn Pittman
Get new article on Slashdot that site is blocking people with add blockers. Slashdotters flock to site to check, sites traffic data balloons to support said site.
Op success!
Ok so your site needs money from Ads to survive, I get it, we all have to make compromises. But you are serving those ads via un-vetted bloated 3rd party scripts which can harbor malware, cost me time and money & track my Ass between sites. Therefore if you put up a page that asks me to accept your 3rd party Scripted Ads, I will send you a copy of my User Terms of Service for you to agree too. In which you will find clauses that require you to accept responsibility for all 1st, 2nd & 3rd party content and resources served by your site and all losses incurred should that adversely affect my systems, privacy etc.
Alternatively, if you wish to serve all Ads in a 1st party context without scripting then I'm powerless to stop you and would be much happier.
So in the end to me its not the Ads themselves that are the problem, but how they are delivered and what hidden factors are present that I consider a detriment to my using your site.
[on] my home consumer-grade broadband router [...] I had forgotten how many of the mainstream ad servers I'd manually blocked by hostname
APK would be proud of you.
If you're like me and wanted to go see if the ad-block detection works, just be aware that bild.de is nsfw and has titties on the front page. Also the ad-block detection doesn't work if you don't allow js to run, for example with no-script.
Christ, nearly 6MB in 642 URL requests just to load their home page once. Anyhoo, from two full fetches of their home page. Excepting the dozens of trackers and advert organisations that I haven't noted to be involved in malware, we have:
smartclip.net: Party to LG "Smart TV" spying without consent.
turn.com: Repeated malware advertisments to-date. Most recently infecting iPhones.
ads.yahoo.com: Repeated malware advertisments to-date.
serving-sys.com: Repeated malware advertisments to-date.
advertising.com: Repeated malware advertisments to-date.
adnxs.com: Repeated malware advertisments to-date, including Angler Exploit Kit via MSN.com
adscale.de: Malware advertisements.
adsrvr.org: Malware adverts, pushing virus-infected toolbars
rubiconproject.com: Repeated malware bundlers, unwanted toolbars, search result injectors, home-page meddling
mathtag.com: Malware advertisements.
openx.net: Repeated malware advertisments to-date.
bidswitch.net: Malware advertising. Most recently infecting iPhones.
This isn't advert blocking. It's a crucial layer of system security.
What we need is a new generation of adblockers: Have it download whatever the ad material is, but just don't render it, and if it includes javascript, fake-execute it in a sandbox. Then advertisers will get paid, and you don't have to see ads, and nobody is the wiser because they won't know the difference. Face it: People who don't want to see ads are going to do whatever they have to to not be subjected to them, and people who don't care about ads will see them.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
However, I'm not running scripts unless I have a compelling reason to do so.
Then watch sites twist overage costs on cellular and satellite Internet into such "a compelling reason":
"Many ISPs meter your data. To save you money, this photo collection uses WebP compression. There are two ways to view it: switch to a web browser supporting WebP, or enable JavaScript to use our Canvas WebP decoder."
"Many ISPs meter your data. To save you money, we deliver only the parts of the article that you actually read. To continue reading past the lead paragraph, please enable JavaScript."
Nope. If you want to block my adblocker, fine, I won't go there.
I find NO ad acceptable, but if web ads acted like newspaper ads and sat there, didn't try to distract me from reading, didn't take over my screen, didn't make noise, flash, throb, etc, I'd TOLERATE it.
These days, ad networks are so laden with malware and viruses (when is Google or another ad network going to get sued for not vetting content?) that an ad blocker is antivirus for your web browser!
Corporatism != Free Market
Major European publishing house Axel Springer has instituted countermeasures against users who employ adblocking software
No problem. I'm sure adblocking users will soon employ countermeasures against Axel Springer, if they still want to see it.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
in discussions about Adblock defeat sites: Anti Adblock killer. Works dandy for me.
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
The national broadcaster in Ireland already does this on their internet streaming service. I wouldn't even mind so much except that I also have to listen to the advertising they broadcast, in addition to paying for the service via the Irish TV licence system.
I raised a ticket about the issue, haven't heard back...
It's become common for a user to read only one article on each of ten sites when he finds articles through web search, citations from other sites, or social sharing. How is anybody going to be willing to subscribe to each of those sites? A pay per page model would have to deal with transaction fees that payment processors charge, which are fairly large for the credit card networks. Even Bitcoin imposes a fee of 0.0001 BTC (currently 2.5 cents) on any transaction smaller than 0.01 BTC (currently 2.50 USD) to discourage "dust spam".
If you really wanted to make it stop, there's a single blob of Javascript that does the redirection. I wouldn't know how to do it, but it seems the variable(or array or object, I don't know what it is in JS) 'de.bild.cmsKonfig' contains the actual redirection URL. I imagine a userscript designed to set that to null would render their anti-adblocking useless.
I agree that DNS-level blocking is effective. It was effective for TWX, who blocked ads on a DNS proxy built into a home router. But it relies on an anomaly in the present web advertising market, namely that ads are delivered from a different hostname from the rest of the site. Thus a site can defeat it by serving the ads and the rest of the site from the same hostname.
the program I built for custom hosts file generation is completely FREE, no strings attached
Does it come with the ability and right to make and distribute improved versions? If not, that's a string.
I used to not block any ads from any site, but Slashdot changed all that when they sent me a video ad that instead of perhaps following me scrolling the page down, yanked me to the top of the Slashdot page where the ad lived.
If you're using Ghostery, you can unblock SMART AdServer but keep everything else blocked in order to browse the page.
If you mention a product or service while one of your "smart" devices is within earshot, have fun watching/hearing the same commercial for that product/service over and over and over and over and over and over and over on tv, steaming sights, and digital radio stations, also be prepared for amazon and other shopping ads on websites trying to sell that same product/service to you. They have you by the wallet. If you want entertainment, you either deal with being tracked like an endangered Rhino, or you pay out your asshole for all the different content providers.
If your web browser is vulnerable, then a script in a page that you view can attack your box even if it isn't an advertisement. Get a web browser that isn't vulnerable, such as a web browser that runs in a sandboxed process.
Who looks at that crap anyway ?
What we need are ad blockers that spoof being non-ad blockers
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
...to insist the world work the way you believe it should work.
Too bad that Capitalism will kick your ass.
-Styopa
If the majority of sites in the top ten results from a major search engine look like WSJ or Elsevier/Wiley journals, with a paywall or anti-ad-blocking measures required to view past the first paragraph, the web will become a more frustrating place. I have already run into this problem with paywalls when I search for certain linguistics topics on Google.
hosts aren't browser addons so they can't be detected
Of course they can be. Anti-adblock scripts do actually detect addons, they detect whether of not they can load the ad. If they can't, because of hosts or an addon, then they flag you as an adblock user.
Addons have the advantage in this game, because they can also block the anti-adblock script. hosts can't do this because the script is on the same domain as the content.
I wish more online pubs would do it. I'm not willing to look at ads, but don't mind paying for good content. I hope this works for them.
Hosts do what you ask: Hosts != blockable by native browser methods like clarityray uses http://slashdot.org/comments.p... :)
*
Top hosts off/supplement it with a custom .css it blows the adplaceholders out too (that, or a PAC file with it)...
(Plus hosts do a HELL OF A LOT MORE for giving users more speed, security, reliability & even anonymity for FAR LESS resource consumption - using what you ALREADY HAVE NATIVELY built-in to your system instead of needlessly "Bolting on 'MoAr'" in redundant, inefficient, crippled by default/'souled-out' browser addons... hosts do more for FAR LESS resources consumed too!).
1 single file beats all comers, easily, hands-down.
APK
P.S.=> Enjoy - the program I built for custom hosts file generation is completely FREE, no strings attached, & gets its data from 10 reputable sites in the security community for blocking BOTH ads + numerous forms of threats online AND hosts clear up DNS' many security issues too... apk
I don't see a problem with this. If I want to read a given site then I have no problem with paying a subscription fee. I'd rather pay than deal with the kind of stupid ads a lot of these places put up.
I went there with AdBlock on and could read as much as I wanted to, view all the articles, everything.
Whatever they're doing, they're doing it wrong.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I went to bild.de with adblock. I don't see the blocking, browsed article, and yes I live in germany with german IP. Most probably it also require java script or flash, so it does not work with anybody comboing flashblocking with adblocking.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Bild is the epitome of shoddy and sensationalist journalism in Germany, sort of like the Daily Mail in the UK.
I doubt the people smart enough to use adblocking read the Bild. And if so, all the better.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Firefox with uMatrix* works fine. No requests for 0.99c.
I highly doubt I'll ever visit bild.de again though, it's just a tabloid. Although since it is not the USA there are Tits. Much like other countries UK, Canada, France, Germany, etc Tits are revered as glorious things as opposed to the place where nipples go that will scar scare and corrupt your children.
(*) No changes to uMatrix's config|settings. And I don't subscribe to the automated lists for uMatrix.
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Sure, good journalism needs good pay ... but what Springer - and especially their "Bild" paper does is neither. Apart from that, their blocking won't work if you have a JS blocker, too ... :) So their technical abilities are similarly good as their journalistic ones ;)
If you want me to view your site without an ad blocker then only have a few non-obtrusive ads (no blinking, no flash, no auto-play, not overly large in file size and in screen size), don't link to trackers as you have logs to see how I navigate your site, don't use excessive scripting, make sure your site is secure, your HTML is good so that browser doesn't have render the page again (for example provide image widths and heights), don't use pop-up, and provide good value.
People discovered that they don't actually need to access the news site and just go elsewhere.
Look, your joy of over advertising the fuck out of everything is dying. Like climate change, you went too far, you fucked up, you can't scale back now.
We're tired of fake download buttons downloading malware, sites trying to misdirect us or trick us into clicking things for that precious revenue stream. We're tired of being tricked and treated like shit by advertisers.
So now we block them. We don't want to see it, at all, and you can't make it up to us now. Shit has hit the fan, I guess you all should have thought of this before 'someone ruined it for the rest of you'
Should have been more choosey over what advertising agency gets to run ads on your site.
All you're doing is making sure that I NEVER EVER use APK.
NEVER.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Most people wouldn't use ad blocking if the advertisers didn't allow malware laden ads be served to their PC's turning them into mindless drones for a botnet. They could fix that problem easily by turning around and vetting ads. Or if the ads weren't so obtrusive and annoying either. Bet we'll see within 3 months that they're reversing this stance, or within a year it shuts down.
I allow ads ... but I block javascript and flash except for a short whitelist and don't have java for browser. That cuts out malware, but also happens to cut out a good amount of ads.
If the advertisers just put up a static image ad I would see it. If they want to use the same delivery mechanisms as malware I don't feel for them.
LITTLE GIRL: But which cookie will you eat FIRST? C. MONSTER: Me think you have misconception of cookie-eating process.
There are "anti-anti adblock" extensions... or lists that you can ad to adblock which kills these type of counter measures.
It's only a matter of time before websites that do this get added to the lists.
I just visited the Bild site, used adblocker, and blocked a couple of scripts running on their site and was in, no problem at all. Very amusing.
We can do much worse than simply ignoring them. We can write some software that downloads their ads, and clicks on everything that can be clicked, _without ever showing it to the user_. Overnight the value of a click-through would plummet, as these mechanical (and worthless) clicks cannot be distinguished from real clicks.
So, is this a risk the advertising industry wants to take?
Wouldn't that be trivial?
I've had malware served as an ad, but that's unusual. The bigger problem is the sheer volume of stuff. One news site that I visit semi-regularly tries to load things from as many as thirty external sites - it varies wildly. I just now opened their page to see today's number: on the home page Ghostery blocks 12, AdBlock Plus another 4. Go to an article, and the numbers rise to 17 and 4. Sorry, that's just too much crap: I am visiting one site, not twenty-two. The site loads many, many times faster without all of that crap.
If they were to give me a choice between seeing their site with ads, or never visiting again, it would be an easy choice: bye-bye. Crappy media sites that regurgitate articles written elsewhere are a dime a dozen. If a site with useful, original content were to take that tack...well, why would they? I subscribe to the sites I value most, and then feel entirely justified in blocking their ads. /. falls somewhere in the middle. I'm supposed to be able to turn off ads, which would be nice, but they turn back on randomly. Anyway, what's with the trackers? The mobile site seems to ignore the ad setting entirely and has been showing the same crappy ads for stupid apps for weeks now. So I leave everything blocked. At the moment, that amounts to seven external sites that I have no desire to see (or be tracked by).
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
I don't know what they've supposedly done, but it doesn't make the site any harder to access for me.
Hmm. I can't advocate DDOS-level of shenanigans, but if there were a couple of bots targeting news sites (if they are reputable, they owe open access to promote open societies, IMHO) that opened the sites with adblocking in place, waited a few seconds for the begging prompt, and then just... left. If there was a large bump in traffic showing just that 'screw you, I'm out of here' reaction, that might help accelerate the end to this greedy folly.
They'd have to be sued by the site operators, and as long as they get money from the advertisers, don't hold your breath.
Fuck off! And not view the site. Which is probably crap anyway.
"If you love someone, set them free. If they come home, set them on fire." - George Carlin
If you consider Bild to be good press, then support their work and pay it. Else zip it.
In France we have an Internet pure player, Mediapart. No ad. Paid access to articles built from real journalist work.
Ad is evil for press, its a pressure tool to control published content.
-- Laurent Pointal
Agreed. will never use it 100% because of the developers conduct on /.
It demonstrates how lazy publishers have become with regards to ads online. With an actual paper, or TV show, the publisher gets and curates ads. They have a staff who sells the ad space, they work with production to determine where the ad fill will go and so on. So the only ads are ones they approved, and they are mixed in with the content in ways they chose.
Online, they just say "Fuck it, I don't wanna." They include links directly back to ad network servers and let those people serve up whatever they want which can include malware, as you noted. They aren't willing to spend any time doing curation, they just want to hand it all to someone else and collect money. Well guys, the result of that is really annoying things like pop ups and dangerous things like malware. The result of those are people turning to blocking ads.
"I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
See subject & those quotes - tell us another one + MalwareBytes' hpHosts liked it well enough to hosts & RECOMMEND it above all others like it...
You've done more, earlier & BETTER? No...
Undoubtedly you're a no balls TROLL I've obviously smoked SO BADLY on hosts all you can do is sit around *TRYING* vainly & effetely to downmod my posts abusing the system here to do it, since you won't post by your "registered 'luser'" name here, that gives THAT much away easily as to your "ne'er-do-well" modus operandi, lol...
---
In fact, per my subject? There was SUCH an increase of demand that MalwareBytes' hpHosts had to MOVE to Amazon "UnDDoS'able" servers due to the demand overwhelming their normal servers...
&
Of course, I can post @ least 150-200++ users of hosts ontop of those quoted above, with more quotes like them IF you wish... just to show how much of a moron you are.
APK
P.S.=> You FAIL as always troll - keep blowing those modpoints - I have NO LIMITS (unlike most ac posters) on how often I can post, so I'll just repost vs. the posts of mine YOU CAN'T VALIDLY TECHNICALLY PROVE WRONG (lol) & run you DRY of those modpoints you abuse, & as always?
I win - Can't help it - That's "what I do/how I roll"... apk
Why can't they be sued by the victim? I guarantee over a billion a year is spent on malware removal!
Corporatism != Free Market
"I changed-out my home consumer-grade broadband router with something a little more stout and I had forgotten how many of the mainstream ad servers I'd manually blocked by hostname." - by TWX (665546) on Tuesday October 13, 2015 @10:14AM (#50717309)
See subject: He had to UPGRADE to a higher-end router!
The kind that most folks can't afford CISCO top-of-the-line & if they buy a USED one, it may be like a CISCO 2811 & routers (like that one) ARE HIGHLY SUBJECT TO ATTACK!
* Nothing does the job like custom hosts files AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO "BOLT ON 'MoAr'" for no good reason & you DON'T HAVE TO SPEND MONIES ON HOSTS like he must have for a NEW higher-end router - you have hosts files already natively, & my program APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o... is FREE + so is the data to populate your custom hosts file it builds from 10 reputable security community sites that provide such data for custom hosts file users!
APK
P.S.=> Accept NO substitutes in custom hosts file - that do FAR MORE for FAR LESS on nearly ANY level you can think of... apk
See subject: "I don't care about you. I care about my software" - Linus Torvalds... get it? Good. Your loss since hosts does it best.
APK
P.S.=> Your stupidities like downmodding me are ineffective. Do you *REALLY* think people don't see you downmodding me but YOU, & those like you sockpuppet, NEVER PROVE ME VALIDLY TECHNICALLY WRONG!
What're you TRYING to "hide"? That you're a paid off shill for some INFERIOR competitor like "AlmostALLAdsBlocked"? It's pretty obvious you are moron!
So, guess again & you FAIL troll... lol!
... apk
Actually, if I read correctly, they HAD the filter in effect and then bought a new router which did not have the filtering in effect. It was already filtered - he didn't need to buy anything new. He noticed the difference when he bought he new router - the new router did not have the filtering enabled.
Okay,
first: BILD is not a 'newspaper' (it couldn't meet the 80-percent-truth (including sports and weather!) criteria that's required by german law) it's just a magazine
second: the 'content' offered is offending, either racist or political garbage (or both)
third: it's connected to the currently ruling party in germany (CDU)
Honestly?
I don't care, less BS on the net
All you're doing is showing us you're illogical and stupid using something that does less and yet uses more (to do less).
Apk's shows /. that shills-trolls can't prove him validly technically wrong using tools that do less + use more.
He's made a solution that does the job better for speed, security, and reliability online for less. Have you wanker? No.
Their papers, which - on a very good day - range in quality from the Daily Mail to the Sun will not be greatly missed by the discerning, so they can block adblockers all they want.
They are desperate to make a lot of money off the internet, that's why they (together with a few smaller publishers) got the German parliament to pass a (called Leistungsschutzrecht, roughly translated as performance or service protection law) that would force search engines, but really Google, to pay them for any snippets you can read on Google News. All the other big news sites (Der Spiegel, die Zeit, heise.de) opted out of asking search engines for this kind of money, because they know that search engines drive traffic to them.
When Springer found out that without Google their page hits (and ad hits) dropped steeply, they granted Google a "free licence", which - since they didn't grant said licence to smaller aggregators or bloggers - ended up making Google even more powerful. And then they started lobbying lawmakers again, saying that the drop in their revenue is a sign that Google is an unfair monopoly.
Ideally, the law would force search engines and news aggregators to carry snippets from the Springer websites (otherwise this would be an unfair exploitation of a monopoly position) and would then force Google et al. to pay for the privilege (otherwise this would be an infringement of their copyrighted crap).
Apk's shows /. that shills-trolls can't prove him validly technically wrong using tools that do less + use more.
That sentence should be taken out and shot.
If he wants to show his product is better he should do it without spamming. That's never going to make me decide to try it, and if he's willing to relentlessly spam slashdot, what other scummy behavior is he likely to engage in? Backdoors in his APK shitware? Selling my user data to anyone who wants it?
If you have to spam your product, my response will be "FUCK YOU".
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
PNGBlocker 2.0 can invalidate DNS records for known ad servers. I don't block ads, I just make them unresolvable via DNS on my home network.
They demand you stop blocking ads, but never address why people block them in the first place.
They are not blocked because people hate advertisements. They are blocked because the psychopaths that are drawn to marketing can't learn boundaries and simple decency. Popovers, popunders, java-blackouts, slide-overs, noise, flash that extends itself beyond the ad borders obscuring the content... all that kind of horseshit is why they got blocked.
Additional to that- the ad-lag introduced by ad servers being massively over-extended. A page that loads in a half a second takes 30 seconds because the ad is coded to load first and make the rest of the page wait on it, while the TRS-80 that is serving the 80,000,000 ad requests per nanosecond struggles to keep up. Not vetting nor reviewing ads, so malware delivery gets pushed out through otherwise trustworthy pages.
Advertisers- clean house. Unfuck yourselves and your servers. Learn how to not be a sociopath. Then your ads will be allowed through again.
However, until the guy who invented blackout-popover/slider java ads is publicly crucified, then kicked in the jimmy till his eyes bleed, there will be no forgiveness. This crime against humanity must be made to suffer.
As long as ad networks are trying assiduously to follow me all around the internet, my browsing will refuse to talk to them without a lawyer present.
I appreciate the reduced clutter and faster load times, but those are not even close to the primary reason.
Quite simply, I refuse to send information, in the form of a Referer or an image URL, from a page that interests me to google, facebook, doubleclick, scorecard, etc.
P.P.S. => I am an idiot ... apk
I'm sick of seeing you advertise yourself all the time so can your hosts file engine block your advertisement posts?
All you're doing is making sure that I NEVER EVER use APK.
His posts are advertisements and his HOSTS file solution can not block those advertising posts. So here is a challenge to you APK, you incompetent fool, show how HOSTS files can block your advertisements!
If you can establish who infected you, to the satisfaction of a non-technical jury, you can go ahead and sue. It does require money and commitment.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Just make sure you have NoScript running. Shame they used browser side checking instead of server side. I could even click on the links and read other articles, or could, if I spoke any German.
Even if you remove JavaScript support entirely from your browser, can you prove your browser's HTML, CSS, and image decoding engines are invulnerable?
Paywalled sites, such as The Wall Street Journal and scholarly journals that aren't open access, keep up their SEO by stuffing most of the keywords in the abstract.
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
APK, YOU need "anti adblock killer" too, right? These scripts try to retrieve an image from an ad domain, and if they fail to do so (because an adblocker or HOSTS ENGINE prevents that), then they shit all over your screen like the idiot pirates that they are.
These user script workarounds aren't just for browser based adblocks, they are for host based adblock too. Because they have to modify or neuter a content-domain hosted script that is trying to ruin the browsing experience.
I think you use these scripts ALONG WITH your ad blocker or hosts engine or whatever.
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
when the hell did THAT happen?!.. Jeesh.. and you think you know a site...
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
....and spams the fuck out of Slashdot.
No.
Go fuck a cactus.
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can PrivacyBadger do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
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. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past a dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better than addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" to each above on PrivacyBadger doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> PrivacyBadger does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):
PrivacyBadger's Adblock+ codebase 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
+
ClarityRay defeats it by dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods!
+
PrivacyBadger adds complexity from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Auto-shill bot to the rescue!
if (post.indexOf ('AdBlock') {
layDownSuppressingSpam ();
}
Ur bot is malfunctioning; thus far there's a 2:1 ratio of ur spam:other content.
Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (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 by a dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (e.g. stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use vs. addons
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on Ghostery doing all that let alone as well as hosts do!
APK
P.S.=> Addons do FAR less than hosts do & FAR 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):
Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
---
Addons add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
ClarityRay DETECTS browser addons like Ghostery & blocks them (not hosts) via native browser methods.
---
What's better than ghostery by FAR?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (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 by a dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (e.g. stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use vs. addons
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on Ghostery doing all that let alone as well as hosts do!
APK
P.S.=> Addons do FAR less than hosts do & FAR 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):
Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
---
Addons add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
ClarityRay DETECTS browser addons like Ghostery & blocks them (not hosts) via native browser methods.
---
What's better than ghostery by FAR?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (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 by a dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (e.g. stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use vs. addons
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on Ghostery doing all that let alone as well as hosts do!
APK
P.S.=> Addons do FAR less than hosts do & FAR 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):
Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
---
Addons add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
ClarityRay DETECTS browser addons like Ghostery & blocks them (not hosts) via native browser methods.
---
What's better than ghostery by FAR?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (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 by a dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound (e.g. stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use vs. addons
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on Ghostery doing all that let alone as well as hosts do!
APK
P.S.=> Addons do FAR less than hosts do & FAR 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):
Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
---
Addons add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
ClarityRay DETECTS browser addons like Ghostery & blocks them (not hosts) via native browser methods.
---
What's better than ghostery by FAR?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
See subject: You certainly care (keep projecting) & LEARN TO READ illiterate dolt: I care about my software, not you or yours (advertisers trolls).
SEE SUBJECT: WHERE HAVE YOU PROVEN ME WRONG SO I HAD TO REMOVE EVEN A SINGLE ENTRY OF MY POINTS ON HOSTS?
(LMAO - you haven't even removed 1, let alone all of them - you're clearly delusional!)
APK
P.S.=> There's NO WAY you can ever, EVER get the best of me on ANY level - I'm proving that in the FACT you can't validly prove my points on hosts technically wrong, & ALL YOU CAN DO is go offtopic trolling as you are now, & issue abused downmods - no biggie: I have no limits & thrash you @ EVERY TURN, lol... yes, I am LAUGHING @ YOU (so is everyone else, loser)... apk
See subject & it's time for you to "eat your words" dimwit:
"I like your host file system" - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)
&
"his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)
---
* Now, what's that YOU said again that YOU HAVE TO EAT NOW, ac troll?
(See below... lol!)
APK
P.S.=>
"Nobody cares about the crap you're peddling, only that you're spamming with your inane posts" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 13, 2015 @05:39PM (#50721189)
So, wally-weasel: Tell us - HOW DID "eating your words" TASTE?
LOL!
Rammed down your throat since YOU PUT YOUR FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH, lol... & "washed down" with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat"... apk
P.S. => learn to fucking write and stop with the "P.S.=>" stupidity.
"Nobody would need to mod you down, because nobody (except yourself, on separate accounts) would ever mod you up." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 13, 2015 @05:39PM (#50721189)
Keep projecting your modus operandi sockpuppeteer (posting by ac & you have an account you downmod me with for NO valid reason (other than I've obviously KICKED THE SHIT out of you before on hosts or some other tech issue & you're still "butthurt" over it, lol...)).
Clue - I don't keep a registered account here or use one (had 1 first time I posted, haven't used it since) & I most certainly do NOT use sockpuppets (but you project YOU do).
---
"Since you do mod yourself up, someone has to step up and correct it. Simple as that.." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 13, 2015 @05:39PM (#50721189)
Yea, lol - TOO BAD I can make it actually CORRECT since I have NO AC LIMITS on the times I can post - so I just post again, & see you COMPLETELY BLOW ALL YOUR "DOWNMOD" POINTS... & guess who always wins then?
YOURS TRULY!
(LMAO - "it's tradition", or getting to be one for YEARS now, lol!)
APK
P.S.=> Now, finally - see subject & "eat your words" fool (same mistake made & you did too stupid):
I've been UPMODDED on /. HUNDREDS OF TIMES (this is only a small partial sampling thereof):
http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
You (like that utter FOOL Sardaukar86) HAVE TO "EAT YOUR WORDS" you pitiful chump, lmao... apk
Actually he's obviously wrong on several points. His software won't run on anything but Windows (point #14). It also can't block various things that uBlock/ABP can. Example: that annoying bar at the bottom of Wikia sites, or the donation stuff on Wikipedia, or the native ads on /. So it doesn't "do more with less", at best it does less with less. It also can't block IP addresses, which phishing and malware attacks can and do use.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
Too short; not apk
Requiem for the American Dream
I am using ScriptSafe for Chrome and disabling loading of "code.bildstatic.de" makes the site work. I think that using NoScript may work as well.
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
Can adblock+ do 16 things hosts do 4 speed, security & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
See subject: That's fact, & ublock/almostalladsblocked don't do TONS of things hosts do (another fact you can't prove wrong)
* So in honor of your talk behind my back b.s. like some gossipy old lady (you pitiful genetic aberration)?
Hey - Bank on this:
I'll post YOUR 'classic fails' vs. myself VERY shortly after this post too!
APK
P.S.=> You're a joke... apk
"Chrome has thankfully started warning users who try to download it." - by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @03:48PM (#49909947)
Google can try explaining it vs. proof my ware's CLEAN (from VirusTotal which GOOGLE owns, you stupid freak):
MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee who also has the source & verified it safe too) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
* :)
In case you hadn't noticed it, like when you made your PUNY THREATS effetely *trying* to "blackmail me" on Hilton Hotels here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ?
(which I could give 2 fucks about, I made the money already on a successfully done large scale project with them on contract)
I SMOKED YOU TOTALLY @ EVERY TURN, & who started it twice here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... AND HERE TOO http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... saying "I should die painfully" etc. - et al?
You failed badly on all accounts.
APK
P.S.=> Especially funny is that you work for CLOUDWORDS (an advertiser affiliate of Marketo) which tips your hand & PROVED YOUR ILL MOTIVES for your stupidity, running away from this most of all -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
... apk
"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)
Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).
UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...
SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...
* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)
---
"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
&
ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...
UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.
---
"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!
---
"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)
You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?
AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
+
ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).
---
YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
I finished YOU WITH IT all above!
APK
P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):
"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"
So
"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"
... apk
If you wanted to make a valid point you'd prove apk wrong on all of his point on hosts superiority and you can't obviously.
Ur malfunctioning. You can't validly technically prove apk wrong.
Apk's replies to adblock users who can't prove him wrong. Neither can you. You don't own /. but apk sure pwns you.
See subject: Just like with hosts & firewalls, except it's Opera 12.x using "By site" preferences. Globally ALL sites disallow script/iframes/cookies/plugins (only on demand no less on the latter) & I create "exception sites" that actually NEED to use script (not many when you come down to it - & certainly NOT the majority)...
* :)
(Besides - IF a site's pulling what you're saying, I nearly GUARANTEE they lose readership like mad in droves almost instantly... it's happened before!)
APK
P.S.=> That's only a natural reaction to this type of stupidity on the part of websites' webmasters from users - they'll leave rather than be infected (ads do that like mad due to Open Bid adnetworks allowing it) & there is ALWAYS competitors' sites they can go to that offer the same goods &/or services etc. too... apk
If apk's an idiot why can't you ac trolls ever prove him validly technically wrong then?
Agreed. Issuing down mods but never proving apk wrong is obviously trying to bury his posts instead. How transparent.
See subject: Says it all on that & TWX is "Bolting on 'MoAr'" (that not everyone has) vs. using what you have natively in hosts, firewalls!
I also use Opera 12.x (best abilities PER SITE I've seen to this very day vs. iframes/cookies/plugins/script etc.) which I also add a PAC file + custom CSS to (removes blank spot ad placeholders) per site...
It all just works, w/out "adding on more" for no good reason (when what you have costs less than buying higher end routers by FAR, & does the same OR better).
---
On my subject: Ads don't PAY served from the same site - & I don't BLAME advertisers for NOT TRUSTING WEBMASTERS' "alleged viewcounts" there - that's why you DON'T see it happening (very often).
APK
P.S.=> I have NO REASON to give up MY SOURCECODE to anyone tepples - I'm under NO obligation to do so - & I believe CODERS SHOULD BUILD THEIR OWN STUFF, not ride on the coattails of others - my opening up my code would cause that, & I am "not with it"... (only people that've seen my code are MalwareBytes' hpHosts admin who verified it as safe since he wouldn't have hosted it in the 1st place otherwise AND he RECOMMENDS it above all others of its kind in fact, it's done so well)... apk
Apk posts facts from reputable sources to adblock/ghostery users you can't prove wrong. He can do that. You don't own /. and there's no law against it. It's very funny the lowness you stoop to that only helps apk all the more. Most specifically your spam comments. It won't and doesn't wash with us reading on your part with that crap.
Apk's free to post facts from reputable sources to adblock users. They don't prove him wrong. Neither can you. You lose.
Shouldn't that be the title, since pretty much everyone I know runs adblocking software of some type, AND I know personally that even with the ads not blocked, I'm simply NOT going to click through an ad on a website, I don't care WHAT site or WHICH ad, and therefore they are just simply a waste of bandwidth that I am paying for.
Advertising is basically paying the site to steal my bandwidth for no good reason, and I'm sorry but if your brand requires advertising on a website, maybe you need instead to concentrate on building a better product than paying money to advertising shills who can't even quantify their value to your brand.
And for you website owners, if you REALLY want to know how valuable the site is, make it a pay site.
I would have no reason to use adblockers (aside from the malware issue, that's sad), if advertisers didn't include the awful FULL PAGE ads, those are basically the same as the damned popups that we all have blocked for years. put a nice static add in the header, or sidebars and i wouldn't block, plain and simple... The advertisers are shooting themselves and their clients in the feet here.
As a former LA Times employee and lead engineer on several of their spin-off web sites, I don't understand why this is such a problem.
I only recently installed adblocking software on all my devices. I resisted, but ultimately I had to. Reading on-line had become extremely unpleasant, or occasionally impossible in the case of some of my older equipment. Adblocking was a breath of fresh air. Now pages actually load instead of hanging for minutes at a time, I don't have to be followed everywhere... you know the story.
But there are a few places I still see ads, even though I've got the most aggressive settings turned on (angry, I was.) I don't mind the ads I see, because they are respectful, done the old-school way, like newspapers, magazines, TV and radio have always done it. The ad is the same media as the host, served right along with the other content. No weird redirects, no waiting for content from a multitude of servers to load, no friggin javascript nonsense, etc. etc. etc.
Hey publishers, you want to save the net and get revenue too? Take a lesson from the old school and go back to delivering the ad embedded in the content, in a way that's respectful of your users.
Hey advertisers, stop being so friggin nefarious and maybe we'll accept your existence like we do elsewhere. When I'm reading a story from the NY Times, blocking the images from the story only hurts me. Give the publisher the display ad just like you did in the columns of the actual paper and our ad-blocking software won't even know its there.
Everybody can win with a method that's tried and true. Until I am respected by the advertiser, I will not respect the advertiser, nor the publisher who gives them a place to shout from. I will go back to reading actual printed media instead. Ain't no javascript there.
That advertisers and frankly people that overly promote capitlist ideals " " are leaches. Compition is one thing. Machismo and Brovodo are one thing. Being a leach to your own fail is stupidity.
Food for thought: how bat shit crazy does this sound My plan is to con enough people into using peices of paper, and then convince them they realy want to exchange that paper for disposable junk but we have to keep people coming in for this to work.
Then prove apk wrong. None of you do. All you do is troll him off topic by ac like you are now or downmod his posts which he beats too by reposts.
Learn to read or don't read it as apk used > 1 syllable words you like. You aren't hurting apk with that bs. You help him by showing your helpless against what he posts and you can't prove it validly technically wrong.
See subject - Have the balls to answer that question vs. this list you genetic aberration:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C talkback
3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop C&C talkback
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C talkback
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (for reliability)
6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoning
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phish
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you past dns blocks
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
15.) Easily controlled data
16.) Do all that & block ads better vs. addons more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage
* ANSWER ="NO" on ab+ doing it as well or @ ALL + hosts = already on every device natively.
APK
P.S.=> Ab+ does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver).
---
Ab+'s 128mb memory inefficiency http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte... (hosts consume 3-11mb using my program initially).
---
ClarityRay defeats it dumping addons in use in browsers via native browser methods!
---
Ab+'s paid to not do its job by default http://www.businessinsider.com... & ABP bought out adblock http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
---
Ab+ adds complexity in a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overhead vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
AdBlock's SLOWER vs. hosts: http://superuser.com/questions...
---
What's best?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
&
It's safe per 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
a 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA you fucking crybaby! APK fails when it comes to blocking ads because his "solution" fails to even be capable of blocking is own advertising posts. So "run Forrest, RUN" from this challenge APK you loser!
I don't use AdBlock Plus, I use uBlock. To answer your points:
1) My browser blocks malicious sites, I'm certainly not going to trust you over Google.
2, 3, 4) I find it's better not to get infected by a virus rather than trying to block it from communicating
5) I don't see Google DNS going down as a big risk, in fact I'd see the possibility of outdated DNS entries in the hosts file as worse
6) DNS poisoning applies to insecure routers. If my router has a security hole I'm getting it fixed/replaced, not using a sticking plaster
7) Ghostery and uBlock both block trackers. There are pages that break without them, so I like having a quick switch to turn off this functionality when absolutely needed. I ran into this just yesterday while activating a credit card.
8, 9) This is absolute bullshit, your software does nothing directly against phishing or spam, this is basically just a duplicate of #1
10) You won't reduce data usage any more than uBlock does, and my home internet connection isn't capped.
11) Again, Google Public DNS, no blocks
12) Any caching resolver can do that
13) Caching resolver, like the one in my router
14) Complete lie, your software is Windows only. And if your software isn't required for a hosts solution (which it isn't), then why are you pushing it so hard?
15) Really? If it's so easy to control where's the source code so I can modify it?
16) uBlock is much more efficient than ABP was, and the additional features provided by uBlock (like per-site whitelisting and blacklisting) are worth the additional resources.
I don't actually read your replies to my comments, I had to go and find this one. I do occasionally see the titles. By all means, keep trolling me. The day I stop seeing you post I'll know to start checking the obits. I want to make sure I get a chance to dance on your grave before everyone else gets there.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
Can ublock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dyndns botnets + stop C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (4 reliability)
6.) Protect vs. redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you by dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded favs
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do those & block ads better than addons more efficiently in cpu + memory use
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on UBlock doing it as well or @ all!
APK
P.S.=> UBlock does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):
Ublock's NOT as efficient:
Hosts @ 3mb-11mb w/ current data vs. threats + ads - test yourself using my program.
UBlock uses 63++ MB -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...
SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
---
ClarityRay defeats it detecting it by dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!
---
UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
What's better?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk
I trust apk over you or Google after you blew it here advertiser http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Tell us how Google's blocking my ware http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
"1) not going to trust you over Google" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
See link above & "tell us another one"!
---
"2, 3, 4) I find it's better not to get infected by a virus" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
I don't get infected due to hosts (mostly). I can't be burned by fires I can't touch.
---
"5) Google DNS going down" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
Why not, considering they're FUCKING UP LARGE per YOU DUMBASS (see 1st link above).
---
"6) DNS poisoning applies to insecure routers" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
DNS poisoning ala the Kaminsky flaw doesn't APPLY TO ROUTERS (routers get poisoned a lot & especially lately - bad choice on YOUR part depending on them)
---
"7) Ghostery and uBlock both block trackers" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
Trusting Ghostery = trusting a fox to guard a henhouse (Evidon advertiser OWN them).
---
"8, 9) your software does nothing directly against phishing or spam" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
Wrong - when I block (& I do daily) the payload sources in them (used to bushwhack you - spoofed send sources change often but actual payload ones rarely do). It works.
---
"10) You won't reduce data usage any more than uBlock does" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
I protect against many things that UBlock can't touch (DNS issues for one).
APK
P.S.=> You fail, point by point (continued in my next post)... apk
Continued from part #1/2 here -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
"11) Again, Google Public DNS" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
Wrong: If a DNS blocks slashdot.org & I want to get to it? I can via hardcodes in hosts: You fail. Google doesn't FILTER vs known bad sites? They blow compared to OpenDNS then!
---
"12, 13) Any caching resolver" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
You're "Bolting on 'MoAr'" increasing complexity + room for breakdown + EXPLOIT!
---
"14) your software is Windows only." - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
Hosts run on ANY OS (that's BSD derived) for the most part & where's yours that does better?
---
"15) easy to control" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
It's EASY to edit hosts - Try regex adblock/ublock use for "normal" users. I showed one adblock's once & he literally said "WTF? Is that Chinese??"
---
"16) uBlock is much more efficient" - by andymadigan (792996) on Wednesday October 14, 2015 @07:00PM (#50731217)
Still WAY LESS EFFICIENT vs. hosts-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
APK
P.S.=> You fail & I am dancing on YOUR GRAVE you genetic aberration/freak - keep "taking it up the ass" homo, you'll have AIDS before you know it, lol... apk
Andymadigan you use 5 things to do what apk does in 1 file (hosts) we already have natively doing things you do + more with less. Complexity isn't good engineering andymadigan on your part. It's opening doors for added complexness and exploitation from using many moving parts.
Apk's made a working efficient solution himself. Have you? No. You're just a trolling no balls ac "ne'er-do-well"!
I just block Java Script and Flash. Send me all the ads you want, just don't use java script or flash.
...we'll shoot ourselves."
(Walks away quietly, waits for the bang.)
Bild...or better called Blöd is not even worth being called a tabloid. It surely is not a newspaper, more a spewing device of lies and deception. Although its oversimplistic story telling is right on target with the intellect and attention span of the 144 character crowd.
See subject: ClarityRay requires native browser methods for dumping what browser addons are in use - hosts aren't browser addons so they can't be detected thus... plus/fact: Hosts do a HELL OF A LOT MORE for giving users more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity (albeit to a lesser extent on the latter) than ANY 1 browser addon does, by far, yet DOING MORE with FAR LESS resource consumption, using what you already have NATIVELY built-in vs. "Bolting on 'MoAr'" for no good reason...
* :)
See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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 per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...
&
It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
---
* "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
P.S.=> Accept NO substitutes... apk
Hosts do what you ask: Hosts != blockable by native browser methods like clarityray uses http://slashdot.org/comments.p... [slashdot.org]
* :)
Plus hosts do a HELL OF A LOT MORE for giving users more speed, security, reliability & even anonymity for FAR LESS resource consumption - using what you ALREADY HAVE NATIVELY built-in to your system instead of needlessly "Bolting on 'MoAr'" in redundant, inefficient, crippled by default/'souled-out' browser addons... hosts do more for FAR LESS resources consumed too!
(1 single file you already have beats all comers, easily, hands-down...)
APK
P.S.=> Enjoy - the program I built for custom hosts file generation is completely FREE, no strings attached, & gets its data from 10 reputable sites in the security community for blocking BOTH ads + numerous forms of threats online AND hosts clear up DNS' many security issues too... apk
Can ublock do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:
1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop C&C communique
3.) Protect vs. dyndns botnets + stop C&C communique
4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop C&C communique
5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (4 reliability)
6.) Protect vs. redirect poisoned dns
7.) Protect vs. trackers
8.) Protect vs. spam
9.) Protect vs. phishing
10.) Protect vs. caps
11.) Get you by dns blocking
12.) Keep you off dns request logs
13.) Speed up surfing by adblocks & hardcoded favs
14.) Work on anything webbound (ie email programs) multiplatform.
15.) Give you easily controlled data
16.) Do those & block ads better than addons more efficiently in cpu + memory use
* ANSWER ="NO" to each on UBlock doing it as well or @ all!
APK
P.S.=> UBlock does less than hosts & less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):
Ublock's NOT as efficient:
Hosts @ 3mb-11mb w/ current data vs. threats + ads - test yourself using my program.
UBlock uses 63++ MB -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...
SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...
---
ClarityRay defeats it detecting it by dumping addons in use in a browser via native browser methods to do so!
---
UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).
---
What's better?
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 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...
It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
+
In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...
... apk