Google Tests Ads That Load Faster and Use Less Power (bbc.co.uk)

Slashdot reader Big Hairy Ian quotes a report from the BBC: Google says it has found a way to make ads load faster on web pages viewed on smartphones and tablets. The company said the ads would also be less taxing on the handsets' processors, meaning their batteries should last longer. The technique is based on work it has already done to make news publishers' articles load more quickly. But it is still in development, and one expert said Google still had questions to answer. The California-based company's online advertising revenue totalled $67.4 billion last year...
The technique limits the scope of JavaScript, and "provides its own activity measurement tools, which are said to be much more efficient," according to article. A Google software engineer explains that this technique "only animates things that are visible on the screen," and throttles animation to fewer frames per second for weaker devices -- or disables the animations altogether. "This ensures that every device gets the best experience it can deliver and makes sure that ads cannot have a negative impact on important aspects of the user experience such as scrolling."

Comments

I can load them even faster

[ark1]

with uBlock origin

Here's an idea

[93 Escort Wagon]

A Google software engineer explains that this technique "only animates things that are visible on the screen," and throttles animation to fewer frames per second for weaker devices -- or disables the animations altogether.

Here's an idea - how about disabling animation by default, and regardless of device? Annoying animated ads are what drove me to completely block them in the first place.

How about no animated ads?

[Dracos]

That would make batteries last much longer.

Something off the rails

[Etcetera]

Something has seriously gone off the rails when an ad/image designer either a) cares directly, and/or b) has insight into device power management and usage.

You're doing it wrong.

How about devices, firmware writers, OS writers, library writers, and application writers (browsers in this case) focus on the power management and we keep remote content creators out of the loop. If you need end-to-end awareness of things like this, it's a sign that your different layers are unable to make sane design choices or write sane platform specifications internally. It's also a sign that you don't care about leaking data far and wide to things that should have no need for that info. (cf. Uber and pricing changes when your battery is low.)

Re:You can load them even faster...

[bigfinger76]

Will you entertain the idea that ad networks are potential vectors for malware?

Re:You can load them even faster...

[PopeRatzo]

content creators

If you want me to care about "content creators", you're going to have to call them something other than "content creators". I find that appellation irritating in the extreme. It says absolutely nothing about what they've done to deserve my money.

I mean, I work very hard on adding value to Slashdot with my shitty comments, so I am also a "content creator". So pay me my money, motherfucker. GIVE ME MY GODDAMN MONEY.

https://youtu.be/0N4b2dmLZII

Re:You can load them even faster...

[Panoptes]

"By blocking the only remaining avenue for content creators to earn a living from their extremely hard work, you are helping put them out of business"

I'm more than happy to put sites that depend solely on advertising derived from third-party ad-feed companies out of business. These, more than any other cause, are the monstrosities that have ruined the web experience for so many people and given any form of advertising a bad name.

Re:You can load them even faster...

[Mashiki]

Of course they won't. And until the ad industry gets their shit together then this current scenario won't change and more people will move to block ads. They did this themselves and are doubling down on stupid instead of going "why are people blocking ads..." Oh right, because we fucked up and allow malware authors to ride along on our networks and screw people over.

Sorry ad people, but using adblockers in some form is basic malware protection these days.

Re:You can load them even faster...

[AmiMoJo]

My worry is that it becomes an arms race. Advertisers looking for ever more intrusive and annoying ways to bypass ad-blocking. We have already seen attempts to detect ad blockers, and then ad blockers blocking the ad blocker blockers in response.

In that sense maybe a standard API for adverts, that is extremely limiting and enforces good behaviour in exchange for not getting blocked, might be a good solution. Static images, maximum file size, no javascript, no ping backs, no cookies, maximum 10% of the page, served from the same domain as the rest of the content. That removes most of the scope for malware and the stuff that slows down loading and wastes battery.

I'd have to give it a trial run, but I'd consider lowering my ad-blocking shields enough to allow that through.