1606
this seems to be the theme of the season mateys
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
wow just wow while i can't say i didn't see this one coming but it always amazes me where greed could lead someone
The more ad-riddled they make the platform to try and monetise users, the more they make adblocks necessary to even be usable.
I didn't use to both with adblockers. I didn't like ads, but they didn't affect me enough for me to go through any effort blocking them.
Now I use blockers everywhere, on every platform. Even for creators I like, because I know how little they actually make for ads - so how bout instead of watching 12 hours of ads so they can get 2c, I just send them a dollar or buy their merch every once in a while to not watch ads at all? Etc.
Ads could have had a place. There are ads that serve a purpose, that have minimal disruption but still give businesses a way to develop awareness for those who might want to use them.
Movie trailers (including when they stopped trailing movies and started leading them) are examples of 'acceptable ads' to me. When I purchase something from a store and they include a printed card from their sponsor. When sports teams have logos for being sponsored. A work van with the business logo parked while out on call. Etc.
But the internet's online ads? Email spam? Telemarketing? These are forms of advertising that are actively hostile, and they've become the default. So now a user that wants to be on the internet at all is best served by block all ads, including the ones that would've otherwise been reasonable.
Google will never make me feel guilty for blocking ads when they're already making their search engine unusable, too.
And while I'm at it, here's the filters to add to your uBlock Origin's MY FILTERS settings to block YT's blocker:
I'll add this the next time I'm on my computer.
Same
Blockers to block blockers. insert Xzibit meme
Thanks BTW.
Wait, surely that doesn't work? It might block the "disable your adblocker popup but there's no way this is all it takes for yt to continue serving videos?
It's feasible that there are other variables that have been missed, but essentially this works. The server asks us a question, and we answer it. We just skip the bit where we provide evidence.
It's like looking up the answers in the back of the textbook on a test. The only thing the server sees is the paper we're handing in, it has no idea if we cheated or not.
Boring technical explanation:
For a server (in this case, YouTube) to see what a client (your computer) is doing, it has to reach out and ask it. When a request is made, the two points will 'handshake' to confirm that they heard the request, then when they've done it. It looks something like this:
These steps can be repeated any number of times in response to a single user mouseclick, depending on what you're trying to do. A 'request timeout' error is what happens if client/server asks "are you prepared?" and it takes too long for the server/client to answer "yes, I am", so you hang up the phone.
For the server to treat clients differently at all, it needs to contact them for feedback. For adblocking, it has to ask your client if you're adblocking. Usually the server does this by sending the client a request to serve an ad - if your client never answers back to confirm it was loaded, then the server knows you blocked the ad. The devs can tell the server that if it doesn't get a certain answer, to enable the punishment effects. (They'll technically be sent anyway; they're just hidden/disabled by default if your client handshakes the ad.)
What these scripts do is lie to the server. The server asks the client if we received the ad, we ignore the script that checks whether the ad is loaded and instead directly change the answer to claim it has. Since all the server sees is the confirmation, it doesn't know the difference.