this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
2101 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59111 readers
4169 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
2101
Google engineers want to make ad-blocking (near) impossible (stackdiary.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
702 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Whirlybird 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

For a tech community there are a lot of uninformed and fear mongering posts in here. From the article:

What About Browser Modifications and Extensions?

Google's proposal remains ambiguous about its impact on browser modifications and extensions. It attests to the legitimacy of the underlying hardware and software stack without restricting the application’s functionality. However, how this plays out with browsers that allow extensions or are modified remains a grey area. As the proposal vaguely mentions, "Web Environment Integrity attests the legitimacy of the underlying hardware and software stack, it does not restrict the indicated application’s functionality."

Basically it can be summed up as “nothing in the new thing actually says it will make blocking ads impossible or even harder, but who knows right? So just trust that it will based on nothing other than fear mongering”

Sites have been detecting ad blockers and refusing to show you content unless you disable them for years. Sites already have paywalls as drm to restrict what you can see. This really isn’t bringing the ability do any of these DRM things since those already exist.

Having said all that - is there much of a reason for this new thing to exist? Debatable at this stage. The only benefit I can see to users is it could eliminate captchas and other “are you human?” checks, as well as maybe reduce cheaters in browser based games (which tbh I don’t even know if that’s a thing).

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think the issue is that Google has both A) a track record of backdooring restrictions on adblocking, and B) an overwhelming motivation to do so seeing as how they generate their revenue from online advertising. They've forfeited the benefit of the doubt, especially when they've already disclosed that the whole point of the change is to enhance the profitability of online advertising:

Google's engineers elaborate, "Websites funded by ads require proof that their users are human and not bots...Social websites need to differentiate between real user engagement and fake engagement"

So given that once implemented, this hop and this skip would just require a teensy jump in order to further restrict adblocking, it is reasonable to assume that's within their desired goals.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Google has a track record of attack articles written against them, all talking up their intentions to tank adblocking, including this attack article. And yet, my adblocker still works and my ads are still blocked. Strange that we just assume this is what they intend to do, when there's no evidence they've pulled it off, we treat it as if they have.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Are you really certain that Google is trying to eliminate adblocking is just an alarmist assumption?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Threatens, as in, hasn't happened and may not. Not all threats are true.

idk how well stuff works on Chrome Mobile. I use a different Chrome-based mobile browser that does allow extensions, and Ublock Origin works great on it. Turns out there's more than one way to skin a cat. Who knew?

I'm well read on Manifest v3. I'm also aware of a Ublock Origin version that is designed to work under it. I have it installed and ready to go, for if and when the old one stops working. But that has only been threatened, too, and not even by Google.

I'm not certain it is just an assumption, but I am also not certain it is a prophecy. Until I get more certain, I'm not going to bust my hump worrying about it. And I'm certainly not going to bellow to the hillsides that we're all doomed.

[–] Whirlybird 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

YouTube test threatens to block viewers if they continue using ad blockers

They can do this without this new API though. Many sites block users if they use ad blockers, have for years, and that's without this API.

How well is uBlock Origin working for you in Chrome Mobile?

Chrome isn't the only browser on mobiles. If Chrome doesn't let you block ads and you want to block ads, use a browser that does. Based on your logic, google would have eliminated ad blockers from Android overall already, yet they haven't.

The fact is that this new API doesn't block ad-blockers. Sites can already choose to block access if you have an ad blocker. There's no change.

[–] Whirlybird 3 points 1 year ago

💯. People are talking like there's currently no way for websites to detect ad blockers or implement paywalls, and this is Googles way of doing it.

load more comments (10 replies)