Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Chrome Starts Testing a Built-in Ad Blocker on Windows, Android (mspoweruser.com)

Posted by msmash on from the cleaning-the-web dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Earlier this year, Google was rumored to be working on a built-in ad blocker for its Chrome browser. The new ad blocker inside Chrome won't block every ad you see on the web -- instead, it'll only block ads that are considered intrusive and go against the standards set by the Coalition for Better Ads. Google has started testing the new built-in ad blocker for Chrome today on the desktop and Android devices. The latest canary release for Google Chrome includes a new option under Chrome's Settings where you can enable the new ad blocker inside Chrome. Users can enable the new feature by going to the Content options inside Chrome's settings page (chrome://settings/content/ads). The built-in ad blocker should automatically block ads that are considered "intrusive." But Google Chrome also lets you strictly block ads on certain sites, and you can also choose to allow ads on certain sites if you'd like.

11 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. You mean... by TFlan91 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You mean, Google will block adds not owned, operated by or sold by Google.

    1. Re:You mean... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's easy to be cynical, but if they can stop the worst abuse then advertising might remain a viable way to pay for web content.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:You mean... by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair, Google has been pretty good about keeping their ads unobtrusive. If this coalition publishes a standard for acceptable ads which any advertiser can follow, and Chrome's ad blocker adheres to that standard, then I don't really see a problem if most or all of Google's ads also adhere to the standard and thus aren't blocked.

      I've had to resort to a strict ad blocker (uBlock Origin), but I'd really like to support the sites I like by allowing their ads through. But it seems every time I try that, I get bombarded with obnoxious or intrusive ads which force me to block them again. I think Google may be on to something. Blocking ads on a site-by-site basis doesn't give advertisers any incentive to clean up their ads since they don't really control the sites where the ads show up. But blocking ads on the basis of how intrusive they are creates a clear incentive for advertisers to move away from obnoxious ads.

    3. Re:You mean... by apoc.famine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I disagree completely. Ads need to be obtrusive to be effective. If they don't steal your attention away from what you were doing, than they are not doing their job. Ads which blend into the background are not ads that anyone wants to pay for. It was demonstrated a long time ago that subliminal advertising doesn't work.
       
      There are no ads which are unobtrusive, and there never will be.

      I'd really like to support the sites I like by allowing their ads through.

      Not me! If I'm on a site I'm there to enjoy the site, not have that enjoyment interrupted by parasites trying to separate me from my money. If I like a site enough that I value it, I'll give them money if they set up a convenient way for me to do it. What I won't do is allow them to use virtual carnies to distract me from why I'm there in an attempt to get my money. That's a really asshole way to run a business.
       
      Between the malware, auto-play shit, overlays, content jumping around the page, and simple breaks in the content I'm actively trying to consume, I see no reason to see any ad ever. They are almost all abusive in one way or another, and websites need to figure out another way to keep the lights on. The core of the web is that my device gets sent content, and it figures out how to display it. I choose not to display the ads, and until everything is app-ized, that's the way it's going to stay for me.

      People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you.

      You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.

      Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.

      You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs.

      – Banksy

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    4. Re:You mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ads need to be obtrusive to be effective. If they don't steal your attention away from what you were doing, than they are not doing their job.

      There are non-obtrusive ads that manage to steal my attention, namely those where the companies are politely and informatively telling about their new products which already interest me and about which I want to read on a special interest site focusing those products and their objective comparisons and trends related to them. Too bad many marketing communications professionals don't know how to do that yet with their products.

    5. Re:You mean... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not turning off my ad blocker either. But like it or not, a lot of internet services are ad funded, including Slashdot.

      At least with Google they are regulated by the EU and other governments. The situation isn't great, but maybe it can get better, and it's worth at least trying to come to some kind of truce.

      Some way we can continue to enjoy Slashdot.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. EU lawsuit in ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 by houghi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously. How could this NOT lead to a lawsuit? Blocking the competition is something that is frowned upon, no matter the intentions.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  3. Re:An interesting development by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no such thing as "well behaving ads". At the very least, they cost my bandwidth. If I am interested in your products, I will go and search for them.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. Make ads STATIC! by p51d007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they would make ALL ads, 100% static, UNLESS you click on them (and I don't mean a mouse over), I would stop using ad blockers. This also goes with the stupid auto start videos, that wait 10-20 seconds to start automatically after you've scrolled down a page, then have to look around to find the bloody thing to turn it off. I whitelist /. because their ads are STATIC.

  5. Re:An interesting development by Zxern · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I block ads because they're malware vectors and not worth the risk. How obtrusive they aren't doesn't really matter anymore. Until they actually look over the code of all ads before they offer them up, I'm not going to allow them.

  6. Re:An interesting development by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This will be a big test for all those people who claim to block ads because they have gotten so bad

    No, it won't, because it does nothing about the worst abuse that ads engage in: tracking.