Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Defeat Perceptual Ad Blockers, Declare 'New Arms Race' (vice.com)
dmoberhaus writes: Perceptual ad blockers were supposed to be the "superweapon" that put an end to the arms race between advertisers and users. According to new research, however, perceptual ad blockers will come out on the losing side in the war against internet advertisers and expose users to a host of new attack vectors in the process. Researchers at Stanford tricked six different visual classifiers used in perceptual ad blockers with adversarial ads designed to trick the ad blockers by making nearly imperceptible changes to the ads. "The researchers tried several different adversarial attacks on the perceptual ad blockers' visual classifiers," Motherboard reports. "One attack, for example, slightly altered the AdChoices logo that is commonly used to disclose advertisements to fool the perceptual ad blocker. In another attack, the researchers demonstrated how website publishers could overlay a transparent mask over a website that would allow ads to evade perceptual ad blockers."
"The aim of our work is not to downplay the merits of ad-blocking, nor discredit the perceptual ad blocking philosophy, which is sound when instantiated with a robust visual ad detector," the researchers concluded. "Rather, our overarching goal is to highlight and raise awareness on the vulnerabilities that arise in building ad blockers with current computer vision systems."
"The aim of our work is not to downplay the merits of ad-blocking, nor discredit the perceptual ad blocking philosophy, which is sound when instantiated with a robust visual ad detector," the researchers concluded. "Rather, our overarching goal is to highlight and raise awareness on the vulnerabilities that arise in building ad blockers with current computer vision systems."
Why would they test a visual ad blocker? Who uses those? All the ad blockers I have ever seen block domains. A visual ad blocker seems doomed to fail.
I don't respond to AC's.
If ads get too pervasive and hard to block people could just disable JavaScript completely.
Perhaps EXPLAIN THAT first instead of going on about a bunch of meaningless nonsense?
See subject: APK Hosts File Engine 3.0++ 64-bit for Linux/BSD h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p
Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any 1 solution (99% of threats use hostnames vs. IP address most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!
Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" slowing u hosts speed u up 2 ways: Adblocks + Hardcode fav. sites u spend most time @ vs. competition loaded w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploit!
* ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI 4 Linux/BSD & supports port filters!
APK
P.S.=> Protects vs. all speculative execution exploits + scripts/trackers (faster vs. NoScript @ kernelmode level)/ads/DNS request tracking + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware/malcript/email malicious payloads... apk
If you want to get rid of ads, you shouldn't be looking to completely prevent them from loading because that's an eternal game of cat and mouse. Instead, you should be looking to poison advertisers click-though information. Basically, fooling ads into thinking you have clicked them and loading things in the background (after you have loaded the page excluding the ads) would have a very negative effect on advertisers because it spoils the very thing they keep track of: who clicks-through to a site. If most people provided a completely false click-through and browsing information it would diminish the value of ads entirely.
Honestly, people are fighting ad networks all wrong.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Ads are exclusively viewed and clicked by stupid people. Let's gas them all for a better world, with no ads.
Make the internet non-commercial again.
would create and update lists of sites they blocked.
And you can always manually individually block sites/domains.
Soon it will really suck if the domain you created has the letters ad in it,
As opposed to AdBlock which exchanges cash to allow some advertisers to "bypass" built in blocks.
First adblocking isn't an "eternal game of cat and mouse". Install uBO and BOOOOOOOOM all ads are fuckin gone forever.
Next you can't "poison" the stats because they are already 99% fake. It's all bots and the ad buyer is just getting scammed. But they're capitalists so fuck them too.
All you're doing is trashing your own privacy, and running dangerous code, for no benefit.
Ad selling capitalists: Scammers polluting public spaces with shitty ads.
Ad buying capitalists: Retarded, but just a "cost of doing business"
You: Retarded redneck NPC, and hapless victim.
Retarded children can defeat hosts files. You are just even dumber and so detached from reality that you can't accepts facts. Still waiting on that list that you said your shitware software can produce that blocks all possible hosts from APK-is-a-retard.com since I showed how all your efforts can trivially be circumvented. You can't because like you, your software doesn't work. I even said I would accept a list containing only 1% but you can't even produce that because all you offer is lies.
Just start DDos'ing any and all AD Servers.
The problem I have seen with ad blockers (and admittedly, I have only tried a few, and haven't put a lot of effort into trying to find the best or most useful one) is that they work by preventing the loading of certain parts of web sites. Like, they refuse to load images from a certain domain, or refuse to load and run javascript from a certain domain, or whatever. The important point is that I believe they work by not loading content that they want to block.
It is my experience that sites can detect this behavior - they can tell when you have loaded all of a page but not the ads, because they can see that your browser only fetched part of the page. They probably also embed javascript in ways that require that it be run and show an ad or else some other javascript notices that this did not happen, and then knows that you did not load the ad. And then they run other javascript that blocks out the content of the site itself because they have detected that you are running an ad blocker.
I don't know why ad blockers don't then just implement the obvious:
Load the ad. Load the javascript. Just turn all the pixels that you display for those ads to white, and all the sound to zero volume. The javascript won't know that behind the scenes the APIs that would display images have instead decided to show white pixels. The remote server will still see you fetching all the content and "presenting" it to the user.
I'm talking about switching ad blocking from a detectable and defeatable "don't show ads" to an undetectable (by the ad displayer) "do everything you would have done up to the last possible moment which is the presentation of the ad image/sound, instead showing nothing".
This seems so much more foolproof to me. It doesn't have the nice property of reducing your bandwidth usage by not even loading ads but ... I personally don't care much about that. I just don't want to see the ads.
The only recourse of the advertisers at that point would be to make the content of the ads intrinsic to the content of the site; like the site text renders in javascript that also renders ads, or something. At that point, I don't know what we do to stop ads ... maybe stop allowing javascript?
In terms of how to detect what is an ad, just let users clock on anything that shows up as an ad image, choose a pop-up "this is an ad", when they select that, white out the image, and add the URL of the ad image to a voting database. Then when fetching images, if enough votes have been cast saying that it's an ad ... treat it as such.
What are the obvious flaws to this design that I am missing?
Between those two I can't remember the last time I saw an ad, and if I do uBlox will generally zap it for me if I point it at it.
Kind of hard to load your ads when I block everything but html from the first-party page...
I don't mind ads placed by the owners of the website. I will look at them and sometimes click on them.
What I loathe is the outsourcing of the ads to some other server somewhere. That's where the shit gets in.
AC
Early generation technologies are often fragile in superficial ways.
Big whoop.
The main counterexamples come from startup ventures who define turd polishing as job #1.
Eventually even the sane do have to polish the turd (in the context of an adversarial arms race) to achieve mass deployment. Ideally, you financed your startup to also succeed at stage Number Two.
the arms race is only possible because browsers are to complex and offer advertisers/attackers way to many work arounds.
the browser is one of the most complex pieces of software on your machine, and its entire purpose in life is to handle the
parsing and display of completely untrusted and often outright malicious data. In what world does this sound like a good idea?
seriously we need to dial it back a dozen notches and go back to a base of data display. The web of today is a shit hole
of spying, exploiting, tracking, and an orgy or advertising. I care less about the web everyday.
The ad JS can check what's on the canvas that it renders to, and send that back to the ad server. So turning it to white won't work. And making it render to a different (invisible) canvas also can be checked for, I think.
The ultimate fallacy of advertisers is exactly the same as with Digital Restrictions Management: They MUST trust the user's computer to act like the instruction list (JS etc) says. Even though *obviously*, given that it's still the user's computer (unless it's a console or non-rooted smartphone), the user can tell its computer to do whatever he wants. It can never work. Period.
Which is why you will probably some day see sites,that refuse to display, unless you don't own/control the computer it is supposed to render on. E.g. like banking chip cards do it: By first opening a secure channel to the TPM computer inside your computer (probably via the IME computer's networking capabilities in the CPU), to verify that you have no control of the main computer and that it only executes what the advertiser tells the TPM is OK to execute.
That was the whole point of the TPM when the criminal Content Mafia cokeheads came up with it to steal our money without working for it, after all.
Because when another drive-by-download or execute vulnerability pop up, it won't help you to load in background you are as vulnerable as loading in plain sight.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
FTFA :
One attack ... slightly altered the AdChoices logo that is commonly used to disclose advertisements to fool the perceptual ad blocker.
Am I missing something here? A slight visual alteration can defeat the recognition of a ad graphic? Yet we are in an era of face recognition and self-driving perception software - and only waxwork dummies' faces look constantly the same, and I doubt that every road "Stop" sign is pixel-perfect identical.
I am pretty sure that I've seen Perceptual Ad Blockers on Doctor Who. They're kind of like psychic paper, only in reverse.
You know, I've given internet marketers a chance to explain themselves. An opportunity to prove they're not complete morons who not only don't understand their product, but their customer. I've been patient with them as they introduce new and ever more obnoxious and invasive advertising techniques that are heavily lauded, but that don't actually work. I've read their blogs. I've commented on their forums. I've tried to speak reason to power. And now... I'm done.
As I've explained to these intrepid idiots in the marketing industry for the last decade, people block ads because they're a blight. They're implemented poorly. They often contain malware which largely goes unpoliced, and they diminish the reading experience on pretty much any site they're on. If you're on a website, and the ads don't completely destroy both the credibility and quality of the host site, you're probably on buzzfeed. Nearly everywhere else, you're going to notice this nonsense.
The war on adblockers is a lost cause. Breaking adblockers is not going to result in higher clickthrough rates. It never has, in the entire time it's been around. If a user LOVES your website, they might whitelist you. Short of that, they'll bounce and get your content from somewhere else. Calling attention to and requesting a modification in the software a user runs is a violation of user rights. Period. Plain and simple. And it raises suspicions about the host site, bringing to the user's mind the other invasive practices a site might be engaged in, and the handling of their personal data in general. If you wouldn't demand to look in someone's underwear drawer when selling them a newspaper, you shouldn't engage in the ongoing harassment of your users in this way. There is no moral difference.
Asking users who are taking aggressive steps not to see ads will only result in lower documented clickthrough rates. It'll result in more bounce traffic. It'll result in fewer people showing an interest in your site, and less exposure over social media. Mind you, a lot of people that have never clicked on an ad in their lives think nothing of sharing your article with their network of followers. If you track the engagement numbers on sites that behave in this way, you'll see a downward trend overall in their engagement numbers -- resulting, ironically, in fewer ad impressions, and fewer clicks.
I don't know if there's anything to do about it. If the industry wants to sit there and gnaw off its own leg, they're welcome to do it. And I'm sure they will. Like I said in the beginning of this rant, they're not exactly the brightest bulbs to begin with.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
Use NoScript. NoScript will kill 99% of ads just by stopping Javascript. If they insist on having Javascript enabled then I'll abandon their site and go elsewhere.
If they force unavoidable ads on us, we'll all just start clicking away like mad motherfuckers and bury them in useless, irrelevant clicks. I'll click on every fucking ad I see and never buy anything.
I do the same thing (more or less) with cold callers who want to sell me duct cleaning or tree trimming services over the phone. I say, sure, come on out- then I give them a bogus address.
If they somehow make it to my door (which occasionally happens) I just give them a blank look and tell 'em, "Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about." (Plus, as I point out to them, we have no trees on our property, so why in the world would I make an appointment for a tree trimming service? heh heh heh)
My hope is that making them respond to the false positives will waste enough of their time and gas and money that they'll eventually sour on the idea, and it may just force them to reconsider if cold calling is really worth it. Three or four wasted trips a day starts to add up for a business that depends on booking valid (i.e. paying) appointments.
I know I'm just one guy....but just imagine the result if we all did that.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Isn't this whole throwing unwanted ads in your face against your will and intention abusive?
Who are the goon-robots programming this shit and the idiots trying to make a buck with this got nothing better to do?
Popup in your face - please subscribe - and have to act upon plugging an email address like "Ihate..." in..
The behavior causing this should be penalized with mandatory pot smoking and we will see progress happening very soon..
i didnt used to bother blocking ads.
Ads didnt used to have malware in them.
Clean up your yard & maybe some day you;ll start building trust again.
That wasn't offtopic, you stupid cunt! Defeating ad blockers and defeating fascism are very closely related. The same tech can be used for both, you fucking moron! Go and eat shit! Fuck off!
IMPERSONATING ME again? I catch you when you do as you have now. Hosts stop portsmash https://it.slashdot.org/commen... but not Spectre/Meltdown - so cut your crap - NOTHING "stops everything" but hosts do MORE for LESS & natively vs. other 'solutions' full of security issues & slowdown (DNS/Antivirus) OR that are crippled by default (adblock) + are EASILY DETECTED & BLOCKED by webmasters (all browser addons) with their messagepass overheads & resource hogging vs. hosts greater efficiency in kernelmode (vs. slower usermode) giving users more SPEED/SECURITY/RELIABILITY & ANONYMITY online w/ proof https://search.slashdot.org/co... .
APK
P.S.=> Grow up... apk
Hosts work vs. threats w/ proof https://search.slashdot.org/co... & DGA tracker lists exist - & I use them!
THERE'S YOUR PROOF!
They generate random names galore & once those appear I block them in hosts too - you lose.
APK
P.S.=> You ALWAYS lose vs. me, lol... apk
See subject: Via APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux/BSD h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p
Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any 1 solution (99% of threats use hostnames vs. IP address most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!
Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" slowing u hosts speed u up 2 ways: Adblocks + Hardcode fav. sites u spend most time @ vs. competition loaded w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploit!
* ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI 4 Linux/BSD!
(Better vs. Windows model)
APK
P.S.=> Protects vs. scripts/trackers (faster vs. NoScript @ kernelmode level vs. 3rd party script)/ads/DNS request tracking + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware downloads/malcript/email malicious payloads... apk
"classic Windows hosts trick to block the Coinhive or Crypto-Loot domains" - https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/a-new-player-joins-coinhive-on-the-browser-cryptojacking-scene/ - BLEEPING COMPUTER
ZD NET http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/ "Hosts files really shine by letting you block ads, spyware sites, malware sites, & tracking sites"
SANS ("A related approach to the DNS issue is to create a hosts file on each system that sends requests for spyware to some place else" hosts by myself & RAMU right @ START of "malware explosion" mid 2005 on) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...
Aryeh Goretsky/ESET/NOD32: hosts = good security https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7442373&.cid=49747129/
Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491/
Spybot S&D uses hosts.
APK
P.S.=> Malwarebytes' hpHosts hosts & RECOMMENDS my program forum.hosts-file.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4290
"It's working: Neville... it's working!" See subject & results from the past 2-3 months https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... & https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://search.slashdot.org/co... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... that's only recently while I've been on Linux (few months now only) & 100's of times vs. MANY other botnets/malwares etc. in the past circa 2006-early 2018 while I was on Windows: CONCRETE VISIBLE UNDENIABLE REALITY (see those links as proof).
P.S.=> ... & that's ONLY what /. reported on (there are FAR more)... apk
Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is quite valid - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK guy, I use his host file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
* For the Win32/64 model...
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient/better MERGE feature too - More coming... apk
Apk has the answer for that - really... kill automatic updates by adding a hosts file entry setting updates.steam.com or whatever to 127.0.0.1. You have to find the right hostname for each software you want to block updates on by raymorris (2726007) on Friday July 06, 2018
APK your posts on this and the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error and/or bad advice by BlueStrat (756137) on Wednesday June 21, 2017
I support APK's stand on the hosts file and can't see why it's not used more than it is. My hosts file is 144247 lines long (4,332 Kb) it & a firewall serves me very well - by Trax3001BBS (2368736)
ABP is insufficient as a solid hosts file does everything APK reminds us about fast turtle September 17 2013
You need APK's hosts file - by Teun (17872) on Wednesday August 06, 2014
* For the Win32/64 model...
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
APK is totally right on this count. Adblock Plus on Firefox mobile is a dog on older, or lower end, phones. A hostfile based adblocker makes for a much better experience in this context. Of course, your phone has to be rooted, which isn't the case with Firefox + adblock." - by chihowa on Saturday May 16, 2015
APK solution STILL relevant Thud457 June 11 2015
In a footnote, I would like to note that I find your hosts file admirable - by vel-ex-tech (4337079) on Tuesday November 24, 2015
APK's monolithic hosts file is looking pretty good at the moment - by Culture20 on Thursday November 17
you're right about hosts files - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26
APK, I know people give you a lot of shit regarding hosts, but please don't ever stop - by nasredin (958927) on Friday June 12, 2015 @03:34PM
* For the Win32/64 model...
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works. - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015
get around to 'installing' a hosts file list, not sure which one, likely the one from someonewhocares.org. If it works as well as what I used for a while about ten years ago, I'll be happy. And grateful to APK for the lesson and the reminder. - by kermidge (2221646) on Wednesday March 27
I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster. - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17
dammit MS, you proved APK right about something by lgw
* For the Win32/64 model...
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
(APK) is still right a hosts file really does work. It even blocked a some of the video ads that were inserted into a stream OrangeTide February 10 2016
the Host File Engine performs exactly as promised - by mmell (832646) on Thursday February 16, 2017
I do use APK's host file on all my systems at home by OrangeTide December 01 2017
I've never tried to belittle (APK's work), I've flat out said it's good - by BronsCon (927697) on Thursday February 11, 2016 @06:48PM (#51491263)
(Toss on 100,000++ users worldwide too!)
* For the Win32/64 model...
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature... apk
Who did it 1st: China or me? I did - dates are my proof https://theregister.co.uk/2017... w/ the FACT China rampantly STEALS U.S. Intellectual properties & military secrets!
* IMITATION truly IS the SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY!!!
(... & proves hosts work vs. DNS faults in tracking you via dns request logs (since you avoid it & resolve FASTER locally using hosts) + DNS being downed OR Kaminsky REDIRECT security flaw misdirected poisoned (or vs. DNSChanger))
APK
P.S.=> Let me tell you ALL 1 thing: It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol - 100,000++ users prove it for me) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE + going FASTER/SAFER/MORE RELIABLY online (w/ a bit more anonymity too via my program)... apk
All Slashdotters should be able to Pi-Hole their network. Combined with client side tools the effect is amazing. Over 15% of the requests on my network are denied now.
Network-wide ad blocking via your own Linux hardware. No client-side software required.
https://www.pi-hole.net
I've been running this for a year or so now, and I looked at the regular unfiltered internet on a public terminal the other day and was aghast. That shit is crazy. No wonder people complain about ads! haha
See subject & TAKE YOUR PICK (of many DGA tracker lists) https://www.bing.com/search?FO...
* You LOSE...
APK
P.S.=> It's ALL you KNOW HOW TO DO vs. me (especially ZIP https://developers.slashdot.or... , lol)... apk
APK can't provide any actual evidence that the Chinese copied him so instead he keeps repeating his lie. He has even admitted that he doesn't have any evidence but thinks that if he repeats it enough that it might be true this time.
APK is world class, a world class loser. Real world class people don't live in a house that their parents sold to them for $1 with a roommate at 54 after living in the basement for years. They also don't spam about their ineffective software on slashdot.
See subject: "Time is on MY side (yes it is)" My doing hardcoded favorites @ TOP of hosts in my program LONG pre-dates China imitating me.
* Period - FACTS are facts...
APK
P.S.=> You're the BIGGEST LOSER, the "Champion" (I won't try compete w/ you there) - why? You HIDE from me by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts like the TRUE LOSER CHAMPION (lmao) you are - so 'brave' & being a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" you are STALKING me (always losing to me though - you truly ARE the CHAMPION of LOSERS - hahahaha)... apk
APK doesn't understand what those links actually mean, time to tear them apart
1. A pop computer site with an article written by a tech journalist, not a security expert. Even at that it is the last suggested solutions with other superior ones mentioned earlier and stated as such.
2. Another pop computer site but this time of lower quality written by someone who has no actual security knowledge.
3. An open forum where anyone can post and their credentials cannot be verified. It is also only mentioned as an also ran long after better solutions.
4. A post made by APK, who is a proven liar, where the statement cannot be independently corroborated.
5. An article where the author goes on about how blacklists are shit and states that hosts when used as a blacklist is shit.
6. Spybot S&D is program that is more effective and does more than all of APK's efforts.
7.His work is neither hosted at malwarebytes or at hphosts, it is actually at a site registered to someone else in a different country.
See subject: Pity you aren't intelligent enough to find ones that WORK as I have & on PortSmash/Meltdown/Spectre? Read on... lol!
* My program doesn't get DGA tracker data automatically - you have to manually MERGE their data in (easy to do, especially in the Linux model (better merge vs. Win32/64 ones)).
APK
P.S.=> The VERY FACT that Domain Generation Algorithm utilizing botnet trackers EXIST (& they do no questions asked & I've used them vs. DGA botnets before) is enough to PROVE hosts can block even dynamically generated KNOWN BAD hostnames/domainnames (like any other malware type - & from a debate I'm having here https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... ?
POSSIBLY even ALL FORMS of Intel CPU speculative execution attacks (I knew it could portsmash, but Spectre/Meltdown I wasn't sure of - my opponent (who's actually HELPING ME there) says it can on the same grounds hosts can blockout portsmash using malwares (works out GREAT for me IF he is right))... apk
You attack? I DESTROY (w/ proof) - e.g. https://developers.slashdot.or...
LOL - best part?
YOU ADMIT YOU HAVE A registered 'lusr' account & yet you HIDE from me by AC posts + DOWNMOD BOMB my posts that blow you away (see 1st link above, lol) https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> I must THANK-you for being SO stupid & making me look GOOD + yourself like the BLOWHARD BULLSHIT ARTIST you are (all talk, no substance)... apk
See subject & EVIDENCE to blow you & "your kind" (chattering "ne'er-do-well" do nothings) away https://search.slashdot.org/co...
* You're the WEAK one with no skills to produce something of VALUE others LIKE/USE/PRAISE as I do, lol!
APK
P.S.=> The PRICE of your WASTED life is showing EVERYONE here you have to HIDE from me by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts as you STALK me (obviously because you're still "butthurt" from my TEARING YOUR ASS UP many times, lol)... apk
The problem of adversarial images has been studied since 2013. There are over 1500 papers citing the original paper. https://scholar.google.ro/scho...
Retard APK continues to try to dodge criticism and fails to address it. I guess he likes conceding and showing everyone that he really is a world class loser. Like the failure he is, he can't produce any real evidence to back up his claims and only offers wild ass speculation.
LOL! You PROVE who's "retarded" then if you can't use search results to find a DGA tracking list of 100's shown.
They clearly exist but you can't find one - lol - try another search engine - one "less advanced" for your FEEBLE skills perhaps (perhaps using BING is too advanced for your "delicate condition", lol).
APK
P.S.=> DGA trackers clearly exist & you're unable to find one you can use out of all BING's results? Come on - helpless Henry, you need to learn how to use search engine results (& you call ME 'retarded'?) LOL... apk
Answer a simple question RETARD: Who did hosts hardcodes 1st - CHINA or me https://theregister.co.uk/2017...
* ANSWER THAT...
APK
P.S.=> You'll EVADE THAT to no end as always & yes I did it 1st - NOT china... apk
No one was questioning who did it first, only that the chines copied you. You are the retard who fails to comprehend the difference and are the retard who fails to provide any real evidence to support your claim. That feature is simplistic, trivial and obvious so it is more likely that they independently came up with it. You are the one making the claim that you were copied now provide some fucking evidence you retarded bitch.
This. Because the outsourced ads are generally horrible and annoying. But very few places bother to run their own ad server anymore, since you have to make an effort to get the ads from somewhere.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }