Slashdot Mirror
Chrome's Ad Blocker Will Go Global On July 9 (venturebeat.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from VentureBeat: Google today announced that Chrome's ad blocker is expanding across the globe starting on July 9, 2019. As with last year's initial ad blocker rollout, the date is not tied to a specific Chrome version. Chrome 76 is currently scheduled to arrive on May 30 and Chrome 77 is slated to launch on July 25, meaning Google will be expanding the scope of its browser's ad blocker server-side. Google last year joined the Coalition for Better Ads, a group that offers specific standards for how the industry should improve ads for consumers.
In February, Chrome started blocking ads (including those owned or served by Google) on websites that display non-compliant ads, as defined by the coalition. When a Chrome user navigates to a page, the browser's ad filter checks if that page belongs to a site that fails the Better Ads Standards. If so, network requests on the page are checked against a list of known ad-related URL patterns and any matches are blocked, preventing ads from displaying on the page. Because the Coalition for Better Ads announced this week that it is expanding its Better Ads Standards beyond North America and Europe to cover all countries, Google is doing the same. In six months, Chrome will stop showing all ads on sites in any country that repeatedly display "disruptive ads."
In February, Chrome started blocking ads (including those owned or served by Google) on websites that display non-compliant ads, as defined by the coalition. When a Chrome user navigates to a page, the browser's ad filter checks if that page belongs to a site that fails the Better Ads Standards. If so, network requests on the page are checked against a list of known ad-related URL patterns and any matches are blocked, preventing ads from displaying on the page. Because the Coalition for Better Ads announced this week that it is expanding its Better Ads Standards beyond North America and Europe to cover all countries, Google is doing the same. In six months, Chrome will stop showing all ads on sites in any country that repeatedly display "disruptive ads."
We already have ad blockers that block ALL ads. All ads are disruptive by design.
You can never have enough ad-blockers/tracking blockers running in your browser, as long as there is stull some memory left in your device to actually display the content you were trying to see.
Google makes way too much money for something like this to block video ads on YouTube. I'm sure this is more of an effort to make it more difficult for people to identify which ad blocker they should use because there is no way this thing blocks YouTube ads.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Almost a monopoly, and their primary business model is ads... Or have they simply moved to just completely selling your data tracking.
I want to keep using a 3rd party extension with the important feature of NOT BEING INSTALLED BY DEFAULT
Simple.... Whatever Ad-Blocker is installed by default will be the ad-blocker that all the websites that want to show Ads spend their efforts detecting and making workarounds for.... workarounds like annoying prompts requiring you to "Whitelist" before being allowed to see the content referenced by the search link you clicked on.
Do those "standards" include websites not showing ads that originate from a network, or contain content, not under their control?
No. The standards ban eight distinct ad formats deemed unacceptably annoying in tests:
- pop-ups (other than exit intent pop-ups)
- autoplaying audio (other than preroll before relevant video)
- vertical ad density over 30 percent of article space
- sticky ad taller than 30 percent of the scrolling area
- prestitials (with countdown on desktop or at all on mobile)
- postitials with countdown
- animated ads that include flashing elements
- screen-height ads that appear as a float rather than inline, thereby pausing scrolling of the article behind it (a format that I haven't personally seen in the wild)
They do not discern whether the ads are served by the publisher or by a third party, nor whether serving them relies on surveiling the viewing habits of each visitor across numerous unrelated websites in order to infer each visitor's interests.
Currently, the standards page includes a pile of 404 errors with -archived-0 in URLs, but the links from the research page still work.
Ads have no place on the internet.
How much have you donated to Slashdot to ensure its financial ability to continue to publish what you wrote? Would you prefer that your favorite sites all go behind a paywall? If not, I'd be interested to read about your third option to fund full-time operation of a website other than ads or paywalls.
All I see is an impostor joe-jobbing APK with a racist diatribe.
But the Better Ads Standards don't cover the content of ads. The Standards cover only ad formats. This means that as I understand it, Chrome won't block antisemitic ads unless they're pop-ups or something similar.
Sometimes, I'm looking for a product to buy. There's a lot of research I have to do to eliminate unsuitable brands, but there are several left. But at that point I'm pretty much asking to be advertised to.
The issue is normally it's a crappy brand I've eliminated that advertises to me.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
That is an interesting point of view. Sans ads and the marketing behind /. It would probably cost $40US a month to run. The rebuttal though is how much loss of wages per month (due to time and bandwidth) you incur on /. .
(I admit this is a spurious comment with little research...ie bandwidth used by /. per month without images and ads and a guess at a $40 linode to host it)
I reserve the write to mangle english.