Slashdot Mirror
Adblock Plus Comes (Somewhat) Clean About How Acceptable Ads Work (betanews.com)
Mark Wilson writes: The Acceptable Ads program from Adblock Plus has proven slightly controversial. The company behind the ad blocking tool, Eyeo, has already revealed a little about how it makes money from the program - despite the fact that no money changes hands in most whitelisting cases - and today it has opened up further about how is makes its money.
Whilst recognizing that people do want to block ads, Eyeo is also aware that sites do need to benefit from ad revenue - hence Acceptable Ads, non-intrusive ads that it is hoped are less irritating and therefore easier to stomach. But Eyeo itself also wants to make money. How does it decide which company to charge to Acceptable Ads whitelisting, and which to charge? If you're expecting full transparency, you might be disappointed, but we are given a glimpse into how the financial side of things works.
Whilst recognizing that people do want to block ads, Eyeo is also aware that sites do need to benefit from ad revenue - hence Acceptable Ads, non-intrusive ads that it is hoped are less irritating and therefore easier to stomach. But Eyeo itself also wants to make money. How does it decide which company to charge to Acceptable Ads whitelisting, and which to charge? If you're expecting full transparency, you might be disappointed, but we are given a glimpse into how the financial side of things works.
It's colored differently and has an 'ad' flag.... At any rate the "Acceptable Ad" thing just sounds too much like the kind of stuff Yelp is accused of, which sounds like what the Mafioso used to do... I know it's popular to hate on advertisers but I'm kinda with them on this. You know. Nice web site ya got heres. Be a shame if anything happened to it...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Let's chat about this after ad revenue has dropped far enough for the advertising networks to fully understand how much our satisfaction is a factor in their success.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
There are a few new snippets of information, sure, but there's hardly full transparency; ... We are instead treated to a short blog post littered with links to other pages on the Adblock Plus site, forums pages, and so on.
TFA (as per quote above) is a vague blog post that attempts to describe another vague blog post. Most of TFA is spent admitting that there is very little content to talk about.
I do not charge for the site, I do not advertise to make money for my site, I have lots of folks visit and post on my site.
It's my hobby. I'm ok with paying a few hundred dollars a year for it.
Years back there was a proposal to make a new internet that was "better" and I was enthusiastic about it because I hoped that all of the people looking to monetize the internet would go to the new internet, and be banned from coming back to the old internet.
Sorry. I'm not on the web to make your site money. Share the information or block the information and I will go somewhere else.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
I weep for the internet as it was before the first advertising appeared. (I was on it then, for more than a decade before Canter and Siegel), and the Eternal September.
"But content! You didn't have 20 pages of You'll Never Believe What Happened Next! Quality clickbait! You didn't have popunders and web bugs and profiling of your every move! How did you manage? That internet was useless compared to what we have today! You'll never get that kind of high quality content without ads!"
The internet: 1969-1993. RIP. You are missed.
If they won't open up, it makes no sense to use their product. I hope such a concept is not too difficult to comprehend.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Any entity that implements an acceptable advertising policy as is specified on the Adblock Plus web site can request to get added to the Adblock Plus white list. The caveat is that if you are a large commercial entity not only do you have to follow the acceptable adds policy, but you also have to pay for the privilege. Paying alone is not sufficient to get white listed if your a large company. Smaller companies and projects don't have to pay to get white listed- they merely need to comply with the acceptable adds policy and request to get white listed.
This is actually the free market at work here and a totally reason solution. There are some companies that may choose not to pay up and some may even block Adblock Plus users in turn. That is the choice of these web sites and it's my choice whether or not I want to utilize these sites on those terms. Adblock Plus gives me the choice to decline to utilize web sites with poor privacy, security, and add policies. I'll continue to decline to utilize sites that implement a policy of blocking Adblock Plus users rather than implement a reasonable adds policy.
I am also an advertiser on the Linux Mint web site. I own a small company that pays Linux Mint directly to have an advertisement on the site. I also use Adblock Plus. I wish Clem (lead developer) would implement the acceptable adds policy as 60% of the visitors don't see our advertisement. I *still* support Adblock's policy and have encouraged Clem numerous times to stop with the flashy advertising so that we can request to have the site white listed. Unfortunately due to one advertiser we lose 60% of the eyeballs visiting the site. I have recently cancelled our advertising for other reasons, but pointed out this issue, alongside a note saying we'd probably return and that the cancellation (many years we've advertised with them) had nothing to do with this. None-the-less I encouraged him to implement the policy.
How does it decide which company to charge to Acceptable Ads whitelisting, and which to charge?
If the owners don't fix errors in the summaries, how can we expect the editors to?
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Adblock Plus; "Nice ad revenue model you got here. Be a shame if it got broke."
I stuck with ABP for years - it had always worked well for me so why change? It was only when they started with this white-listing that I looked around for an alternative. uBlock has worked well ever since.
They already do, and this is the unintended consequences of blocking ads, that those who block ads become second-tier citizens and have to resort to piracy to get the content that was previously ad-supported.
I think you're confusing who's the second-class citizen here. If I wanted to, I could (*shudder*) disable adblock, but I wouldn't want to risk that on a hostile site. There's also the option to use and adblock-blocker-blocker, to automatically nuke the script that detects adblock. Or I could set my useragent to Googlebot, let them go ahead and block Google if they don't like it. And anything they could do like sponsored shilling, would affect non-adblock users as well.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
But the white listing has done nothing. I still have seen no ads with ABP even with the white listing. Maybe I'm just careful about where I visit, but I wouldn't drop it until I start finding it to be ineffective.
...do just that, block ads, and be even better at doing so if it is named "AdBlock Plus". There is nothing wrong with offering the user the opportunity to view "acceptable" ads if they wish, but it should be the users choice to choose what is acceptable, not the applications.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
We're now getting into a war similar to the spam war. The advertisers are going to shout louder and louder. The technical experts are going to block harder and harder. We're already at the stage of having adblock-block-blockers. The advertisers will soon try to get laws to make these illegal, if they haven't already. This will get nasty for the normal users and cause a collapse similar to the collapse of News Net. We will be able to use the internet but new users will be stuck on particular closed sites like Facebook.
The path out of here needs someone independent of the advertisers to agree on criteria for safe, accetpable, reasonable advertising (no tracking, no popping up, no taking over the whole page, no active elements). It can't be done by people like the IAB or government advertising agencies who are in the pockets of the worst elements of the advertising industry. It won't work to completely ban advertising except, possibly, by having your teleco provide control it which is almost more scary.
Right now Eyeo's Acceptable Advertising program seems to be the only game in town. Google and the new ad replacing browser are the alternatives. It needs our support until something better comes along.
I leave the Slashdot 'Disable Advertising' box unchecked. Becuase I am not bothered by the ads, and maybe now and then something might catch my eye, and I'll give it a click....supporting Slashdot as I do. Bills have to be paid after all. However, if the ads were in the face 'YOUR PC IS AT RISK FROM VIRUS' etc, then this is unacceptable..... This is what AdBlock is for, to get rid of these crappy fear-ware ads. I honestly don't mind seeing ads that don't get in my face.
I would. Just because something works doesn't mean we shouldn't investigate alternatives. I found ublock to be quite a bit less resource intensive. Not relevant on a computer but critical on cheap tablets and outdated hardware.
This revenue allows us to hire employees to do the hard work providing that service demands. Software engineers have to maintain the whitelist, monitor it and provide customer service to each whitelisted site, whether payment is involved or not.
So they need to charge to pay for the manpower and infrastructure needed to be able to charge. A bit of a circular argument. The Easylist block list is over six times longer than the acceptable ads whitelist, yet is maintained by volunteers. I'm sure the community could maintain a whitelist if salespeople were no longer required.
If it doesn't block all the ads, it's not an ad blocker. It's just an ad filter. That's not what I want.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Can you pay a large sum to allow ads with viruses to get whitelisted?
The very term "acceptable ad" sounds a bit underhanded to me; or perhaps it is just that we have already lost all trust in the advertising industry and through them, in the companies that advertising in that way. They should rethink they whole ambition and the strategy that follows from it: the term should be "Wanted Ads": advertising that people actually want - like when you go online and search for "where can I buy X within 10 miles of Y?" That's when you want to find adverts, but only if they are genuinely matches for the parameters given.
Lucky Patcher uses a combination: hosts file and it can disable the advertising services in Google Play Services. You can do that also with tools like https://play.google.com/store/... , I used that to disable the analytics spying service too.
I assume you are paying for Slashdot and not using this service for free?
- Raynet --> .
Glad to see my comment here hit a nerve and probably had some influence on this. Transparency is clearly the way to go, with the clarity that the company wants a monetizing strategy. We all want to make money, so it only makes sense to admit it and explain why and how, especially when you provide services that affect stuff so broad such as consumer rights.
I'm frankly surprised that Slashdot hasn't done something to prevent all of the free advertising APK gets here. If they want to push their product, they can pay for the privilege to do so like everyone else.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
There is no such thing as acceptable ads. The advertisement industry has ruined the whole thing, and I feel no pity whatsoever for them.
There used to be a time when a little bit of advertisement was acceptable. But once you've pissed all over your host, you can't come to the next party, even if you promise you won't do it again. Not anymore. Not after you've promised it twenty times, and twenty times pissed all over the host, his guests, the food and the neighbours dog.
There's a point where you are just not invited anymore, doesn't matter what you promise, how sincerely you promise or how much you really, really mean it this time.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
What happened to "If its not broke, don't fix it" mentality?
While I agree with knowing alternatives, I'm sure ad blocking software would be LOW priority on my list to just know about.
How in shit did you get modded up for your bitchwhining? You can turn off acceptable ads with one checkbox which is respected by the addon. It's not broken, you just don't know how to use it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm frankly surprised that Slashdot hasn't done something to prevent all of the free advertising APK gets here.
I haven't seen an APK post in ages. I know, one more mention and he'll appear, but even so. Perhaps they HAVE. Or did you actually mean ABP? If so, hilarity.
Whoops, just saw one. I guess he's not putting his name on them any more. Surprised he didn't do that sooner since his name is so bad.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Is this ad acceptable?
*grumpy cat macro*: NO
Determination made. That was easy.
I've been using ABP for years now on my machines and those I admin for friends/family/clients. It was, as we all know, a good solution for a number for reasons: Using less bandwidth, limiting infection vectors, and of course removing annoying ads.
However I've recently switched to UBlock because it simply runs better...and it does not have any sort of "acceptable whitelisting". Now I actually still pretty much trust ABP as I'd used it a fair amount since they have allowed what they deemed as acceptable ads. Not only could you opt-out (Yes you were auto opted-in however.) but some times when I did forget to opt-out I did not see anything egregious.
None the less with an alternative out there that is faster I think it is a good thing to give it support. As I've said about this topic before, I'll use my hosts file again if need be to block ads. I'll personally update it if that is what it comes to. The tears of ad execs do nothing but bring me joy as they rationalize why they have a right to my bandwidth and all of the other data they want to collect.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
uBlock is excellent. As is uMatrix. With uMatrix, you can do a whole lot of fun stuff. It's a veritable old-school software firewall for your browser. There's even a version for Firefox now. It's like NoScript on steroids. Once you figure it out, you're all set. There's a slight learning curve but it's not bad. It's just a whitelist approach. If you want, you can lock everything down and have nothing but text, nothing from third parties, and not even images or scripts on the page. It works at wildcard, domain, and sub-domain levels. It's fantastic.
I've been using it for years now. There's also HTTP Switchboard, by the same guy, but there is no Firefox version of that. With a wee bit of extra invested time, you can just install uMatrix and dump uBlock. Though, admittedly, it doesn't give you those handy statistics about how much has been blocked overall.
For this page, there are 37 requests. I'm allowing 11 though. That's uMatrix.
uBlock 9 items, or 33% of total content. Over time, it has blocked 23%. You don't really get those numbers with uMatrix. Meh... No big deal. uMatrix works quite well and you don't have to run them together or anything. You can but there's no real need to - though sometimes uBlock hides the fact that it hid stuff a bit better. Though they both block the same thing - sometimes uMatrix will leave you with a gaudy blank spot.
But, if you want, you can just run uMatrix and save the RAM. It's really quite configurable. The upper-left part of the control panel is actually a click-able area. When you click there, you can set sub-domain, domain, and even wildcard. Wildcard settings apply to all sites. That means you can block even first party scripts until you specifically enable them. You can block first party images, CSS, frames, etc... You can block third party, allow third party, select by domain, block per domain, and all sorts of fancy stuff.
It's really kind of nice to be able to have the web your way. Add to that GreaseMonkey and Stylish? It's like a whole new web out there. Once you set the settings in uMatrix, make sure to click save. Then you've only got to do it once and the next time you return it will retain the same settings. You can do all sorts of things - including using blocking lists and hosts files - and they'll update automatically. 'Snot a bad application.
I'm not affiliated. I'm just a happy customer. Oddly, you can't even pay for it. The author wants no donations. The author will accept no donations. The code is open. Have at it.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
> What happened to "If its not broke, don't fix it" mentality?
Not everyone has that mentality. I usually find that's held by systems administrators. The rest of 'em are saying, "If it ain't broke, tweak it."
It's what we do. I've been breaking stuff in new and interesting ways for a long time.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I like uBlock, but it doesn't play well with Ghostery. I haven't decided which is better, and so I run both and let them battle it out.
The "White List" thing sounds like a cool idea in theory, but in practice, I find a "black list" thing is more desirable, particularly when you block javascript.
Most sites require javascript. But some sites do obnoxious stuff like preventing printing or stop you from trying to copy text. That's where I want to block Javascript.
Javascript blocking should at this point be a blacklist option.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
You must be kidding. He posts at least 3 times a day on here.
Hey, look, the fucking moron that claimed he was done psting here.
Since we can't trust you at your word, your HOSTs engine is very obviously not trustworthy either, you lying sack of shit.
Not like it matters beause every program coming out now days is hardcoded to bypass your HOSTs bullshit.
Meanwhile, they can't bypass my router block.
Dedicated hardware = 1. HOSTs = -1,000,000
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Dump Ghostery and use uMatrix. It's lighter. They don't sell your data. It's free and open. It's not intrusive. It's a billion and three times more effective. (Err... I'm making that number up.) It does many, many things that Ghostery does not do. Search your favorite browser's extensions for "uMatrix" and have a look. It puts Ghostery to shame.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
It doesn't block ads, it shouldn't advertise itself as an ad blocker. Why do people keep using ABP at all?
windows 10
Ever wondered how many sites would disappear without advertising revenue to fund them (hosting and bandwidth has to be paid for somehow)?
Not really, no. Their bad business model is not my problem.
Or are you prepared to pay a subscription or fee for every website that you use?
I'm prepared to pay a subscription to every website that provides me adequate value to justify a subscription. I already do this for several. Most don't provide much value and I wouldn't mourn their loss. Very few provide enough value that I would willingly sacrifice my privacy and web browsing habits to an advertising company.
Frankly, websites that exist solely because of advertising can die in a fire. Nothing of value will be lost.
You mean like Google? You think Google provides nothing of value to anyone? I think many would disagree with you. Their offerings might not be valuable to you specifically but clearly many others are ok with them as a company that exists solely because of advertising.
In principle some advertising is fine. The problem is that advertising companies can't seem to help themselves in abusing that relationship. Unfortunately the advertising companies have done so much damage that no one with a brain trusts them anymore, including myself.
Can the summary actually summarize what ABP does say, in addition to the commentary about how it still isn't transparent enough?
Don't ask APK to live up to his word or be honest. Everyone knows that the first rule when dealing with a spammer is that spammers lie. APK is no exception. If he wanted to be honest then he would have made an account and used that to post instead of making a bunch of AC posts that try to pass themselves off as someone other than him.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Still getting used to the interface for uBlock though.
Same here. I am using uBlock origin as a NoScript substitute on my chrome-based browser, and decided to add ABP's acceptable ad list to it. I can never tell if it actually does anything because I still pretty much never see any adverts. Odd.
I rarely get ads on my phone becuase I don't use apps that are serving up ads. I do get ads inserted by youtube on my television though, can't use adblock or ublock for that. I did put a "lite" ad filter on my router but it's not blocking youtube ads so it's no help unless I can figure out the relevant addresses.
What happened to "If its not broke, don't fix it" mentality?
While I agree with knowing alternatives, I'm sure ad blocking software would be LOW priority on my list to just know about.
The mentality died when people realised the car was faster than the horse.
It was a stupid mentality anyway accepted by people who don't think for themselves. Do your self a favour and dump that mentality in favour of continuous improvement. You'll find a lot of things weren't broken but were holding you back.
Does ClarityRay block APK spam? If not, can you please add that feature?
Sorry, thought I was logged in ... hate being the Anonymous Coward ...
What happened to "If its not broke, don't fix it" mentality? ...
The mentality died when people realised the car was faster than the horse. ...
It was a stupid mentality anyway accepted by people who don't think for themselves.
Actually, 90% or more of new things are gone within a year. Trying all of them is a terrible waste of time!
Pick out the ones that make sense to your needs. But jumping on every new thing is for corporate salesmen and fraud artists!
8-P
I assume you are paying for Slashdot and not using this service for free?
Last few times I checked, the subscription button didn't work.
Last I heard, they were setting up for it, but there was such a "stir" that they abandoned it. But that was two companies ago...
Actually, 90% or more of new things are gone within a year. Trying all of them is a terrible waste of time!
I didn't say jump. I said "continuous improvement". The underlying concept doesn't include jumping on every new thing that comes up, but rather starts with a question of "what can I improve". In my case it was adblock plus hogging resources combined with a bit of controversy about it accepting donations from advert sites.