why is there so much shilling in this site againt adblock plus and its whitelist feature? companies dont pay adblock to whitelist their ads, they pay adblock to review their ads and see if they fit the rules of the whitelist.
This process is transparent to the community and they can give feedback. This is exactly the compromise the internet needs, a way to fund sites through advertising and a way to tone down the annoying adverts.
edit: Their ad whitelisting critera: [link]
You can still block everything by disallowing acceptable ads in Adblock Plus settings.
This "allow acceptable ads by default" thing was introduced 3 years ago in Adblock Plus version 2.0.
AdBlock and AdBlock Plus are different softwares. AdBlock Plus have not been purchased, AdBlock has. Also, the Acceptable Ads program is 'not' a bought spot. It's a whitelist with non intrusive ads which you can opt out of.
>No applicant will be favored or treated differently, and no one can buy their way onto the whitelist. Everyone has to comply with the criteria and everyone has to go through the same process before the ads qualify as "acceptable."
From Adblock Plus's FAQ.
I have little to no issues with non intrusive ads. It's about time advertisers on the internet stop with the intrusive terrible ads. At least this shows that companies are starting to realize how big of a market they lose by allowing ridiculous ads to go live.
Hello. I'm RedditGloriousLeader, can explain now? Imgur fats blackmail us into getting rid of fatpeoplehate, so we chooce 4 smallar subreddits to dismiss as excuse to stop fat, lazy stupid fats from blackmailing. Subredditdrama and shitredditsays is happy, so we all win. yes
Edit: Neofag banned because critical of bad behvaiour even if vagina is there
Leave the TV on static for a couple days. It may be too late for your TV to reverse the effects. Worth a try.
Just switch the tv to its tuner and pick a channel that doesn't come in at all.
Edit: If you are unlucky enough to have a digital only tv tuner in your tv. [link]
Edit 2: Apparently, some people don't use this [link] make sure it's installed in Chrome/Firefox to not sully the black magic Youtube video I linked.
> then I guess find an alternative
Or just untick the "Allow non-intrusive advertising" checkbox in Adblock Plus settings. This was added 3 years ago.
More websites these days think they can catch me with this shit, well they are wrong.
ADD BLOCK PLUS ELEMENT HIDING HELPER.
You may have to select more than just one element to get rid of the entire pop-up ( as they are usually made up of multiple elements) including the stupid darkened background element but it works 9 out of 10 times.
That's the whole point of acceptable ads. Ads that do not inject malware and are not intrusive. The whole idea is to make the internet a better place, where content authors can still have ads to make money, as long as they adhere to the guidelines of not fucking shit up everywhere.
You can read about the whitelist here.
Do they realize that Adblock has acceptable ads? If advertising companies would create less visually intrusive ads, and/or if sites would place ads in acceptable places so that users didn't feel the need to block them, there wouldn't be an issue.
>Adblock Plus exists to save its users from annoying ads. However, we don't think that all ads are bad, and we are fully aware that website owners need them to survive. Therefore, we have established strict criteria to identify Acceptable Ads: unobtrusive ones that don't need to be blocked. Websites that are willing to comply with these criteria can apply to have their ads added to the Acceptable Ads exception list, which will unblock them for most users. Note that if you don't want to see any ads, you will always be able to opt out of this.
If you're confused, just follow the money, and you'll know what's up.
> The typo correction feature is an additional revenue source for the Adblock Plus project. [...] Whenever typo correction brings you to the site of a large online shop an affiliate ID will be added to the address. <em>(source)</em>
Now this does seem to be a bit useless and on the shady side, but at least it's not overly intrusive. If you say no to the first prompt, it automatically disables this... feature, and you can turn it off in the filter options as well.
Let's not spread FUD on what's "acceptable" like it's some arbitrary, shadowy term. They outline exactly what an acceptable ad is and every company requesting is manually verified. You can also disable the feature that allows unintrusive ads so it'll block everything.
My general feeling on ads is, if it's a content creator you enjoy and want to support, there's no reason to not allow them to make money from ad revenue.
I recommend ad block if going here:
Edit: you can get adblock plus for free for chrome and firefox here for those that are interested [link] its just an extension and blocks all those pesky pop up ads at most streaming websites like this.
First of all, Adblock and Adblock Plus (ABP) are different extensions. The one /u/Cloo159 is showing is ABP.
Now, they do have an "acceptable ads" program, in which they allow ads that comply with their conditions (e.g. not moving ads, not flashy, not intrusive, etc.), though in order to do that, companies* must pay ABP to have their ads whitelisted. For example, Reddit is included in such program and that's why you see Reddit ads by default since they are just basically static images.
ABP have had this program since, like, forever. It's nothing new. It upsets people because it's enabled by default, though it's completely optional. To disable it, you need to go to your settings and uncheck the box that says "Allow non-intrusive ads", and that's it. This also upsets people because many think less tech savvy users are exposed to ads they "should not be seeing", and there's not an immediate way to turn them off, unless you do a cuple of extra clicks.
The reason to choose uBlock over ABP, in my opinion, is because uBlock has a better performance. And that's it.
* Big names, such as Google, Apple, Amazon, etc. "Smaller" companies/websites may or may not pay, depending on how you define "small". Thanks /u/Baukelien.
They do track us. Respecting Do Not Track is not part of the requirements.
> These criteria are not necessarily final; we are always working at improving them. In particular, we want to require that every user's privacy is respected (e.g. mandatory Do Not Track support). However, we are not yet in a position to enforce that requirement.
This is why I don't support them.
yea I haven't used Ultimate Guitar in a while. I thought the site was dead? It's like the 9Gag of tab sites...
It's a pathetic cycle. People stopped using it because of the shitty advertisements and so, as a response to losing ad revenue, they've gotten more hardcore with ads.
If anyone from Ultimate-Guitar reads this, here's some advice from a web developer: users don't like intrusive ads. Your product is your user base, which you sell to advertisers. No product, no sales. Of course, you also rely on your users being willing participants. Fortunately for us, unfortunately for you, we have tools like AdBlock Plus with which we can negate intrusive ads. That said, this is used as a mechanism to protect our computers and ourselves against the aggressive, and frankly offensive, methods by which you've chosen to advertise to us. Fortunately for you, though, AdBlock Plus offers a list of criteria that ads must meet to not be blocked by ABP. This isn't actually a difficult set of rules to meet, or unreasonable. You are welcome to sell my page hits to advertisers if you meet the above criteria with your ads. Otherwise, though, I do not consent to being sold and so your advertisements will not reach me in any manner you could legally undertake.
That's the idea, maybe convince more advertisers to stop being horrible; they mentioned that in their FAQ about "Acceptable Ads".
> By doing this you support websites that rely on advertising but choose to do it in a non-intrusive way. And you give these websites an advantage over their competition which encourages other websites to use non-intrusive advertising as well
As for me, I have a 250MB data cap daily, anything above text ads eats from my data pool.
The Ad Block Plus devs are well aware of this issue, and they're trying to avoid it. Take a look at the Acceptable Ads page on their site:
> Starting with Adblock Plus 2.0 you can allow some of the advertising not considered annoying to be viewed. By doing this you support websites that rely on advertising but choose to do it in a non-intrusive way.
> Why is this feature enabled by default?
> Unfortunately, this is the only way to accomplish the goals described above. But if the majority of Adblock Plus users have this function activated, advertisers will have the incentive to produce better ads.
> AdBlock Plus has the "acceptable ad" feature.
What I really want is an ad-blocker that is off by default, but which I can turn on for specific sites. Most of them can be turned off for specific sites, but I don't think I've found one which can easily do the inverse. I know most blockers can do it if you manually write rules, but I'm talking about a really simple interface, like replacing the "disable adblock on this site" button with an "enable adblock on this site".
That way, I wouldn't be depriving sites of revenue unless their advertising had actively annoyed me.
If a large number of people were doing this, it would have the effect "acceptable ads" policies aim for: pushing advertising in the right direction by disincentivising obnoxious advertising, and reducing collateral damage to sites with unobtrusive ads. However, it would be more democratic, and would not be suffer the same conflicts of interest and potential for corruption that centrally-maintained "acceptable advertising" lists do (ABP development is funded through fees paid by whitelisted networks, which is a. potentially corrupting for whoever decides what is acceptable, b. arguably extortion and c. counter-productive because it takes money away from sites that are doing advertising right).
> I have no idea how to get an ad-blocker
Right, I'll take this opportunity to 1. tell you why you need an ad blocker, and 2. how to get one.
You need an ad blocker because you care about your computer. It probably cost you a lot of money, after all. See, site owners can't be arsed to manage the ads on their site themselves, so they outsource it to ad companies like Google. Ad companies, in turn, don't really care about ad content, as long as it makes them money. This means ads can contain whatever piece of malware or cpu/bandwidth-hogging shit its author chooses. Ads commonly track your whereabouts, meaning your browsing habits end up being sold to God knows who. In a world where, say, a potential employer can buy that kind of information to check up on you, I'd be worried. You should be too.
Think of the ad blocker as a vital piece of internet hygiene. You wouldn't attend a job interview without having showered and brushed your teeth, nor should you let other people use your property and privacy to earn themselves money at your expense.
Now, onto business. Head over to [link], click the green "Install" button, and follow the instructions. Congratulations, you now have a baseline defense against malware and people tracking your browsing habits. You should find a red "ABP" stopsign appearing somewhere in your browser indicating that the plugin is installed correctly. Feel free to browse the settings: in particular, you will probably want to uncheck the checkbox named "allow some nonintrusive ads". Head over to Youtube and enjoy your ad-free videos.
TL;DR: Site owners should take their own goddamn responsibility for the ads they display on their site, because 1. I want the ad click profits I generate to fall onto them (and not some shady middlehand), and 2. I want to know who I should sue when a malicious website ad installs malware on my computer or steals my personal data.
seriously dude : add blocker .... I did not noticed there ware adds on that site [link]
how do you people even internet?
Edit:Or UBlock like it's been suggested [link]
It's enabled by default so that more people will allow reasonable advertisements. Most people aren't necessarily against advertisements as a general rule, but big, flashy, distracting ads are annoying. I don't have statistics for how many people actually leave the non-intrusive ads enabled, but this survey suggests that most people would allow it (or at least wouldn't go to the effort of disabling it).
Åbent brev til danske medier:
> Hej danske medier
> Det er ærgeligt at høre at I har trænge kår p.t., men vidste I at det er muligt at få reklamer der bliver vist på trods af ad-blockere?
> Det kræver såmænd bare at man laver reklamer, der ikke er irriterende eller påtrængende, og som ikke involverer splashscreens med brugerundersøgelser.
> Det vil koste lidt på bundlinien at omtænke jeres reklamestruktur, men det vil til gengæld give adgang til at få reklamer frem til en stor del af dem, der ellers ville blokere dem, og det er da noget at sigte efter. Det kunne endda være, at hvis jeres reklamer var mindre irriterende, så ville folk måske endda whiteliste jeres sites!
> Lad være med at vente på at det bliver en nødvendighed for at I kan overleve, men gå det i møde og vis fremadsindethed. Det vil jo nok faktisk blive belønnet!
>Det syntes jeg da selv er værd at tænke over.
Which one? AdBlock plus or the regular AdBlock? There's a setting in AdBlock plus that shows "Acceptable ads" that can be turned off any time.
Edit: From my understanding everyone is freaking out about the Acceptable Ads program that has been there for a long time now.
Here's some info on what Acceptable Ads means, what the criteria is for ads so be whitelisted and how to opt out.
ThumperLovesValve had seen somewhere that it might be so that they make it permanent in the future, but that's not the case at the moment and for now we got no source on this.
If only the people behind Adblock had made an Android app which anyone could find with a simple Google search. Too bad that's totally not the case at all. It would really be dumb if they had literally done exactly what you asked and you didn't know about it just because you never thought to do a search for it
What I think is the biggest crime here is how you can just browse the internet (and in particular SMH) without using Ad Block Plus. You really should not be subjected to ridiculous bandwidth chewing ads and a bloated experience.
Here's my SMH experience, just for reference.
Try this Adblock addon (written by the same team):
Intuitive selector that makes it a lot easier to write your own rules. I have a few for almost every site I visit (sidebars, comments, etc)
You may enjoy these rules. To add: open up Adblock preferences, go to "Custom filters", add a group, then add filters:
What these rules remove:
IMHO, Facebook is unusably noisy without these rules. Hope this helps!
>Disable Malware Domains
>Slow startup, popups, advertisers hijacking your browser: Those are all signs of your computer being infected by malware. Even worse, computers infected by malware open the doors to all kinds of cyber criminality threats. These infected computers can then be used to sending out spam emails or attacking other computers or servers, stealing passwords, social security numbers, personal documents and credit card information.
Adblock Plus can be configured to block domains known to spread malware, protecting your computer against viruses, Trojan horses, worms, spy- and adware.
>To enable this feature now, please open this dialogue and click “Add” to protect yourself against malicious domains. If you wish to disable this feature, please read here how to do this.
> It's AB that was accused of extorting ad companies, not ABP.
You have it reversed. ABP accepts money from advertisers to show their ads. AB does not and exists solely on donations.
Source from ABP
Article about the "shakedown"
It has to be installed manually, since google removed it from the app store. The best non-root way to block adds is to use the AdBlock browser, otherwise it only blocks on wifi and after manually changing a lot of phone settings. You can download both Here.
Oh, thank you. I just learned this. And then found how to remove this. Adblock even made a page on how to remove this, in case it helps : [link]
I must recognize that as this page says, I'm not totally against adds (see bottom (page, not mine)). Only intrusive ones. But I prefer being able to choose sites to whitelist for non intrusive adds than to find adblock chooses for me, and only for sites I support
To be really fair, Adblock Plus in Chrome has known issues -- namely it can't block in-video ads. I imagine Adblock cannot do this either (since it's due to Chrome's extension API -- though I hear this is something that'll be possible in 2012)
This! Ad-blockers are now important for security! I recommend ABP for non-tech users and ublock-origin for techies. [link] [link] [link]
Are you sure it doesn't exist on Android?
Edit: Since the big text people see is for their new browser: if you guys read the small text there is a download to the android AdBlock application (NOT their browser!) [link]. However, it only works on WiFi by making you route all your traffic through it (unless you have a rooted device, where this step is unnecessary).
If you use Adblock Plus it's probably the non-intrusive ads option: [link]
Also mandatory "did you know that uBlock is better" speil: [link]
> then now they have to pay again to some other company to have it be allowed to be viewed by people
To be fair to ABP, that's not that they're paying for. Ads can get whitelisted with no payment, provided the ad developer actually goes and reads the requirements for whitelisting and implements them on their own. If they don't want to go to that effort, they pay ABP who go "Here's what you need to change before we'll whitelist your adverts". It's more of a not-doing-your-homework tax.
I didn't go into much detail with my previous comment, but I'll do so now.
For 95% of users, WebKit's first-party content blocking is a huge step towards better privacy and security. Even with extension reviews and open source codebases, you're still very much at the mercy of adblock publishers when using their extensions.
Consider AdBlock Plus, an open source, community-backed extension. In 2013 it pushed a questionable monetization method called typo correction, which silently changes Amazon and other affiliate links to their own ID. Under the guise of being an opt-in feature, they actually prompted users to enable typo correction whenever they entered a malformed URL with the message "Do you want Adblock Plus to correct typos to protect you from malicious websites?"
AdBlock Plus' typo correction is just one example of the tremendous power extensions have over your browsing. Additionally, 3rd-party open source is a paradoxical thing. When is the last time you compiled the extension and did a hash comparison of what you installed onto your system? Most people would trust Apple's (open source) WebKit implementation infinitely more than something delivered by an arbitrary developer. Things like the HoverZoom malware scandal should really make it clear that installing browsing extensions incurs risk. Browser sandboxes don't protect against extensions sending your credit card input entries to some server in Russia.
Anyway, I've written far too much. You're right in that Apple hasn't done anything magical. Rather they've brought ad/tracker blocking to the masses, at the right time, in a way that doesn't compromise the user experience. I'd expect nothing less from Apple.
Facebook is everywhere and in business with everyone.
At a minimum, you should be using Firefox with AdblockPlus, and Ghostery.
And IMHO, unless you absolutely need Facebook for business reasons, you should scrub your profile as best as you can and then delete your account.
You obviously don't know that there's adblock for android too. A little buggy but it works
EDIT: OK looks like the app disappeared from play store. Probably you have to download it from the official website, i honestly don't remember.
EDIT2: yep i checked you have to install it from the official website [link]
Adblock plus on android creates a proxy which routes your network traffic through it in order to block ads. It is mistakenly picked up as the source of that traffic because of that. Source [link]
If you are rooted adaway works much better and doesn't have that problem.
Adblock Plus has a way for you to get your website whitelisted, at least by default - as long as they meet non-annoying ad guidelines. (i.e. users can turn off the whitelist...) See here.
I didn't explicitly whitelist reddit, yet I still have ads on reddit.
A lot of those are ads, you should be running ad block plus on your browser to insure you're not going to fake or fictitious sites through rouge links... If you're not already.
[link] then after install it'll bring up a page of extras and enable the malware block option.
Adblock Pro for Android
>Before you download Adblock Plus to your Android device, make sure app installation from unknown sources is allowed by Android:
>Open Settings and go to Unknown sources option (under Applications or Security depending on your device)
>Tap the checkbox and confirm the upcoming message with OK
I haven't seen an ad in over a year on YouTube, or anywhere else I go in the interwebs. (Hulu is the only exception.)
The only wrinkle is that you occasionally have to "tap to refresh" every so often at the beginning of the video. Small price to pay.
I don't use Apple stuff, so I'm unsure how to help there. Hopefully someone can chime in with a similar fix.
Adblock Plus is now allowing certain “acceptable” ads to be displayed, but the user can opt out (I have). These aren't paid for, rather, they have to meet certain requirements (listed here).
However, if you're talking about the other Adblock for Safari and Chrome (which I used to use until ABP finally released a Safari version), I can't answer. I've heard rumors that Adblock sold out and allowed certain ads through, but I haven't seen any evidence of it myself. The only thing I've experienced (and this is with ABP as well) is that often Youtube ads won't be blocked. But I'm pretty sure that this is a limitation with the way Safari prefetches resources in Flash objects, or something like that.
Edit: I've just seen your reply to emcniece. I wasn't aware of that, and it's quite disappointing. Hopefully somebody will take up the total ad-blocking mantle again.
Easy fix : [link]
I had the same problem and the fix linked there, fixed it 100% no more annoying youtube adds:)
They aren't selling ad space. They are simply adding the pre-built whitelist from [link] to their app and turning it on by default. You can turn it off and it goes right back to what you had before, which you didn't pay a dang cent for. Which is obviously why you don't want to pay a dang cent for someone else writing an article for you to enjoy.
If you use AdBlockPlus on the desktop, this is already happening to you. They created this list.
Edit: Here is the FAQ that AdBlockPlus posted about when they made this same change that Crystal is doing, only on the desktop.
Not necessary friend. Just disable Ad Block's "Acceptable Ads" option and it will remove all the ads.
This isn't really news, it has been this way for a while.
If you're interested...The "extortion" was in the form of 'don't make your ads like angelfire or geocities flashy and invasive'' and it wasn't directed at the websites, it was directed at the ad agencies who deliver ads to web sites... and then websites who choose to use agencies who deliver geocities/angelfire ads.
They tried the same thing back in 2012: [link]
Adblock figured it out then. Not sure if it's going to be the same thing, but I imagine it won't take long for a workaround to present itself.
I've had the unenviable position of "the computer person" in my family for fifteen years and help many older people that are either unable or unwilling to grasp computers on any level other than rote memorization, usually with an adversarial relationship to technology. I would say the number one cause of shit breaking by a long shot is online advertising.
People would get stuck in ads that put the fake toolbar up top (it is way more effective than you'd think), get redirected to phishing sites, get viruses for fake anti-virus software, or just have horrible Flash memory leaks shit the bed.
People that have grown up with radio and television where you can't tune into a channel that will break your set come in with the same expectation and it's often impossible to convince them otherwise. Installing AdBlock as a matter of course has reduced the frequency of things breaking from once every month to maybe once every two years, with the person that keeps disabling it being the only one I have to see on a regular basis.
There are other ethical issues such as how Facebook ads have outed vulnerable teenagers and companies tracking people's medical health that could be used by employers to fire sick people before they start making insurance claims.
I do think AdBlock Plus demanding money to put things on the "acceptable" list (even if it's just "large properties") is very unethical, though.
How about fixing the memory and performance hits first! It has been a year since they blogged that they will do something about memory consumption. [link] I have yet to see a positive impact.
Firstly, understand that this is a feature of "AdBlock Plus" plugin, which is not in any way connected with the other popular ad blocker named simply "AdBlock".
AdBlock Plus has a setting which when enabled by the user, shows ads that have been "screened" and are "acceptable". Advertising companies pay to have their ads screened and approved by AdBlock Plus. If you ad has annoying animations, auto playing sounds, etc. it won't be approved as an "acceptable" ad. I think it's obvious that it's a money making strategy for the developers behind AdBlock Plus, but it's not necessarily a bad idea.
They even put it in the feature list of the plugin, they're not attempting to deceive and hide it from users.
I personally don't use the feature that shows "acceptable ads" but I can understand that at least some people would intentionally enable it. There are people who want a balance of having ads to support a site, but not being bombarded with irritating ones.
The AdBlock Plus blogpage mentions a possible use of this feature is to prevent your boss from seeing that you saw a message from him that told you to go do work on a weekend.
I can solve one of those problems. Adblock Plus works with any browser you're likely to have and gets rid of pretty much every ad out there. Flashing banners? Nope. Google contextual weirdness? Not unless you allow it. YouTube unrelated crap at high volume? Never. (Well, unless it's an actual video, not an ad before a video. And you still don't want to read the comments.)
Anyway... it would be nice if the sidebar suggested including a genre, but given how often I've guided people to Vocaroo and/or the sequencer, I think expecting everyone to include a rough genre in their post title is a bit optimistic.
No idea, but there is adblocks for Android that operate at an OS level, meaning they block in-app adverts, browser based adverts, etc..literally any traffic that comes from servers on their list gets blocked
One thing to bear in mind is that adblock has recognised this and doesn't block all ads by default anymore, it blocks intrusive ads only by default now.
>This is our manifesto:
> * Acceptable Ads are not annoying.
> * Acceptable Ads do not disrupt or distort the page content we're trying to read.
> * Acceptable Ads are transparent with us about being an ad.
> * Acceptable Ads are effective without shouting at us.
> * Acceptable Ads are appropriate to the site that we are on.
Additionally, for a FriendlyPirate, calling someone a shit for simply using one of the most popular addons on the web (directly because of the deluge of banner ads, popup ads, misleading ads that we all had to get used to), isn't really super Friendly.
Both Adblock and ABP are trying to monetize their userbases in ways that make me uncomfortable, but at least Adblock Plus was transparent about it, announcing it on their blog. I can't say the same for Adblock.
And to be clear, I didn't post this here to plug ABP (personally, I'm rooting for µBlock). I only want others to be able to make an educated decision on which adblocker they want to use.
This technique can be applied to any website that provides a direct download link to the movie. For this example, I'll be using movreel
This should allow you to stream the movie in a mobile friendly media player.
adblock for android is a 'kind of halfway' thing - it works for some things while ignoring others.
Adaway is the real deal. I've been using it for a few years now and have never been disappointed in it. In fact it was the main reason I rooted my HTC One (M7) a week after I got it.
Good news, adblock plus does this now. Tons of people are super upset about it, but it's got to be one of my favorite features.
Adblock's "acceptable" ad rules
Before, Adblock blocked all ads. Then Adblock Plus introduced Acceptable Ads and Adblock followed suit soon after.
Acceptable Ads is basically a list of all places where ads are nonintrusive. For example, whereas youtube ads are intrusive (because the ads prevent viewing the video, they are animated, and they have sound), reddit ads are not(because they only appear at the top of the page, they're static, etc. etc.).
You can turn acceptable ads off in Adblock by going into the options menu.
It should be noted that Adblock and Adblock Plus (ABP) are two different brower extensions. Adblock is for Chorme only while ABP works on Chrome and several other browsers. The one sold today was Adblock, not ABP.
Now, /u/t-ree's answer says:
> Another was the fact that it began an "Acceptable Ads" program, where companies (e.g. Microsoft and Google) could pay Adblock to allow their ads through the filter.
This is kind of misleading. The ABP's "Acceptable ads" program works for <strong>any website</strong>. If you own a small or medium sized website and you wish to be whitelisted, you can contact ABP's team. If you meet their criteria about non-intrusive ads, your site will enter the program for free (i.e. you don't pay a cent). It's not only meant for Google and Microsoft, though obviously big companies must pay.
These ads are enabled by default but there's an option to turn them off and see no ads at all (if you are still seeing ads even with the option disabled, then it's a problem not related with ABP).
The whole concept of acceptable ads is that advertisement on the web exists but done the right way (or the ABP way, anyway). By letting YouTube ads be displayed though, which are videos, this idea turns out a little hypocrital, in my opinion, and goes against the supposed ABP's manifesto for better and non-distracting ads, but that's a debate for another day and I'm not well documented in that regard.
Unfortunately, t-ree is right about ABP's performance, which is subpar compared to uBlock Origin's, which is an absolute advertisement blocker and in general blocks much more shady garbage than ABP. This quickly made it The ad-blocker everybody should have.
That site isn't affiliated with Adblock Plus. The about section on their site even says:
>AdBlock was inspired by an extension created long ago for the older Firefox web browser called "Adblock Plus" (which was in turn named after a yet older Firefox "Adblock" project; yes, it's confusing), but it's not related to those.
Here's the ABP donation page, btw: [link]
> on my phone (which doesn't have any ad block apps)
Here you go for Android.
Here you go for iPhone.
Admittedly, I don't know much about Windows Phone, but if you have one, here
I do not understand the point of knowing vote scores at all and use AdBlock Plus Element Hiding Helper to hide them.
I know that's, like, against the the core principles of reddit or something but whatev. Post like the votes aren't there, and if you can't ignore them, literally make them disappear.
uBlocks is just better software than AdBlock Plus from a technical perspective. It doesn't blow up your browser's memory usage by an order of magnitude.
There are a bunch of blathering idiots who think whitelisting means selling out. AdBlock Plus made a push for whitelisting unintrusive ads a while back to promote responsible advertising. For large companies like Google, AdBlock enters a paid contract with them. People who don't want to do 3 seconds of research think this is "selling out" even though absolutely anyone can apply for whitelisted ads for absolutely zero charge. Oh, you can also disable the whitelist with a single check box in the settings so it's not like you're even bound to it.
That's what OP was trying to say I assume. I use uBlock for performance reasons but if Adblock Plus wasn't such a crazy resource hog I'd use it with the whitelist enabled.
There are two types of ways AdBlock will block ads and these are done in tandem.
The first is to completely ignore the address of the ad server.
That is to say, if a site is requesting from DFP, then the browser will not make the request at all. This behavior may be observed by opening Fiddler with and without Adblock and going to most any site with ads.
The second way it may block ads is by element hiding.
On some pages the ads are self-hosted instead of hosting through an ad server. This means there may be a div on the page which returns an image.
AdBlock will remove the div on page.
In addition to this it may also detect and remove div's with certain sizes such as 728x90 and 300x250. For example div of size 300x250 will simply be removed from the DOM (document object model, or the page itself). This usually results in content shifting around the removed div and the user having no indication that an advertisement should be on the site in the first place.
More information may be found here - [link]
To alleviate AdBlock there are various options available to Publishers, my favourite is to have the server request the ad and render it on page as if it is self hosted with a div @ 100% width/height. However, some adservers will block that many requests at once.
Edit - Just realized I didn't actually answer your question. The answer is no, the impression is not counted as AdBlock will not even load the address. It is simply blocked from being requests and, on most sites, the containing div is removed.
This was on /r/tech yesterday already. tldr; only non-intrusive ads, and this is available for all websites for free.
>Article could be rewritten as:
"Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and others agree to fund continued development of AdBlock Plus while making their ads less intrusive."
There's no story here.
>It's not new. From 2013
>Starting with Adblock Plus 2.0 you can allow some of the advertising not considered annoying to be viewed. By doing this you support websites that rely on advertising but choose to do it in a non-intrusive way.
>Whitelisting is free for all small- and medium websites and blogs. However, managing this list requires significant effort on our side and this task cannot be completely taken over by volunteers as it happens with common filter lists. That's why we are being paid by some larger properties that serve non-intrusive advertisements that want to participate in the Acceptable Ads initiative.
You can also get adblock for phones, have not seen an ad in ages.
Edit: Ad block plus has an app, however I use adaway. Please note that if you are not rooted, you can only block ads while you are on wifi, not data. If you are rooted you can block every ad. My phone is rooted and adaway only works for root.
Doesn't work on youtube, sorry.
Actually, Reddit by default is already a whitelisted site with Adblock Plus since Reddit offers unobtrusive ads and conformed to Adblock's acceptable ads requirements.
> IE lacks major add-ons like ABP
If it's to download YouTube videos there's millions of websites that can do it for you...
I honestly haven't missed any of the plugins that I used in Chrome.
I have always had issues with Java and Flash on Firefox, where it severely bogs the browser down. That's why I didn't go with it.
Safari has been retired.
>people found out their little dirty secret and started giving them shit about it
You are spreading FUD. The acceptable advertisements list was never a secret. In fact, it was discussed and debated publicly for months. You seem to be under the impression that advertisers are essentially bribing the developers to let their advertisements be shown, which is completely false. Not only did a user survey reveal that only 25 percent of Adblock Plus users are strictly against any advertising, all of the advertisements on the acceptable list must follow this set of guidelines. Guidelines that, as I stated earlier, were publicly debated for months. Your claim that they only made acceptable advertisements optional after people complained about it is also completely and utterly wrong; the acceptable advertisements list has and always will be optional.
Its part of the 'acceptable ads' initiative.
This page lists how to turn off the option, making adblock go back to blocking every ad, it also details why the option is turned on by default:
tl;dr: Its a program to let less intrusive ads through while still blocking other ads so, you can support the websites you go to without being bombarded by 15 autoplaying video ads.
I thought something similar, but they clearly state the opposite on their acceptable ads page:
>No applicant will be favored or treated differently, and no one can buy their way onto the whitelist. Everyone has to comply with the criteria and everyone has to go through the same process before the ads qualify as "acceptable."
While this is by no means a guarantee of good behavior, at the very least you can be somewhat sure that if they did take bribes at least somebody that's noteworthy would have spoken out against this specifically.
If this has indeed happened, be so kind as to link me. I'd be interested to see that.
There are many other comments here explaining why, let me quote some because I have a feeling you won't read them on your own:
>They're not pulling shit. They're trying not be toxic to the way the web works. Non-intrusive ads were never the problem and they help keep a lot of really neat stuff (like reddit) free. You want to incentivise good ads rather than starving the market and forcing admakers to be sleazier and sleazier to make up for lost revenue.
>The thing is, many of the people on Reddit feel like they should be able to use the resources of companies to access that companies' content while blocking all revenue that the company could make. What they don't understand is the consequences this is going to cause in the long run. It's simple entitlement, even completely acceptable, non-intrusive ads are unacceptable in their eyes.
Also I believe there's an adblock browser that runs on Firefox.
I like to be aware of interesting live threads that I may be missing out. You can hide that section easily with AdBlocks Element Hiding Helper. With that add-on you can fine tune any website locally, I hide divs that I don't like.
You can use adblock plus on an unrooted (normal) android device but you must install it outside the google play store by downloading what's called an apk file. Google "adblock plus apk", install it, and then follow these directions:
Everybody loves the Dramatic Story of Betrayal, and how OMG, teh Good Guys were actually teh Bad Guys all along...! How Could I Have Been So Naive!!1! Oh, Woe Is Me...!!1!one!
When in fact, it has been ABP's stated business model since 2011 that they think the way ads are being done now is the problem, and not the existence of the ad-supported revenue model, and their entire mission in life is to transform all ads on the web into Text-only, Friendly Little Ads over on the right hand side of the content or down at the bottom where they can be easily ignored.
They want to starve to death the ad networks who run that stupid Punch The monkey flash ad, and all crap like it.
"Allow some non-intrusive ads" is a single checkbox right on the front of the configuration screen and can be turned off by any user who thinks the ad-supported model is Completely Evil and should just fucking die.
Corporations you don't like, like Google and Microsoft have to pay good money to even be considered for the ABP whitelist, and ABP have been very transparent about the whole program. Strategically, it's two kinds of good that ABP is squeezing the big guys for more than they would from a world where all ads are unfiltered. Ad networks are now a malware attack vector, and the existence of ABP and Ghostery reinforce the idea that you have the sovereign right to control what information comes into your web browser.
ABP is the thug you hire to protect you from the thugs you didn't hire; ABP is a bouncer, or a bodyguard. ABP is not Gandhi.
Flash ads are, and even a simple animated gif, due to its binary nature, could potentially be an attack vector. ABP wants to go back to a world where all ads are Just Text so they can not be used to fuck with your hard drive.
I'll just be nice and not sarcastic. DO NOT give your credit card number. All of these movies sites are knowingly facilitating illegal activity. None of us care about that, but it also means that you shouldn't trust the website very much.
Most "free movie" sites are full of redirects, shady ads, and malware. Use Adblock Plus and run Malwarebytes every so often (the free version is fine). Don't save anything or download anything when a box pops up. Use Alt+F4 to close popup windows.
enjoy your movie
Just fyi this only works over a mobile connection when you have root access. If you do not have root access it will only filter ads when you are on a WiFi connection. It's always been this way [link]
I doubt it. Wladimir Palant the developer says otherwise...
For the time being, Flash is still the overwhelming way they push ads. The countermeasures against ads will always evolve.
i do my best but i do it assuming that our subscribers are doing their part too.
don't fap without it.
pop-ups & 3rd party cookies are disabled in your standard browser settings.
No, he's right. Adblock Plus is owned by Eyeo GmbH, and has partnered with companies to show acceptable ads that they won't block.
They even say this on their website here.
It sounds like you haven't added a filter subscription. You wouldn't use these two subscriptions at the same time, but the two most popular/general ones are Easy List and Fanboy List.
To add a subscription from those sites, click the "Add <list name> to Adblock Plus" link. Alternatively (from Adblock Plus), open the Adblock Preferences --> Filters -->Add Filter Subscription
See the full list for more additional language-specific subscriptions, and check out the main sites for EasyList and Fanboy List for privacy and tracking subscriptions.
Met AdBlock Plus met Element Hiding Helper (ja, een addon voor een add-on) kun je het omzeilen.
Maarja, dat dat nodig is bewijst natuurlijk dat het een kutsite is.
Are you aware of the allow acceptable ads feature of adblock plus, and would you consider revising your ad policies to take annoyance levels into consideration? I turned them off because I didn't think it was acceptable for me to be getting large pictures of scantily clad "asian ladies in your area" at work. P.S. ad organizations - I listen to asian music... that doesn't mean you should try to sell me asian porn.
Det handlar om tjänster som är så dåliga även utan reklam att ingen är intresserad utav att betala :)
Kan varmt rekommendera www.omni.se, med reklam, reklamen är subtil och i samma format som nyheterna men alltid tydlig med att det är just reklam.
Sen är ABP bra som har denna [link]
Adblock Plus works just fine on Android without root. The website says it only supports wifi if it's unrooted since you have to change the proxy settings manually, but when I tried it worked when I changed the proxy settings for the mobile data connection. [link]
AdblockPlus already make money by enabling ads from some companies that pay for it.
Also, there's rumors they are tracking and selling user habits to marketing companies.
If, for some reason you disagree with it, you can install the free and open-source uBlock.
Your information is extremely misleading (and the source is biased as you yourself said, so I'm not sure why you still chose to cite it; or if using it, you should have at least done further research to verify it first...), so I feel an obligation to correct it:
>Our goal is to enable as many people as possible to have authentic conversations and share ideas and content on an open platform.
Read the FAQ:
Why does Adblock Plus appear to consume so much traffic?
To filter ads, all traffic has to pass through Adblock Plus. Android considers this to be the traffic caused by the app, while it is in reality the sum of all traffic.
You can disable whatever websites you don't want it on, but installing Adblock Plus on any web browser of your choice will usually eliminate the problem by removing advertisements from webpages, especially the "You won a Wii! Click here to claim your prize!" type of ones. It also tremendously speeds up browsing (in my experience)
Bigger websites actually have to pay ABP to get on this unfair list. Disabling it is the first thing I do (though I use it only in Firefox, i.e. rarely)
edit: [link] [link]
Specifically, look at this comment from Till, who phrases it very well:
"Regarding the unblocking of certain ads we need to think ahead: At some point ABP will have so many users that some websites can't afford producing high-quality content for free anymore. I don't expect the majority of the users wants paywalls on every website (which btw would only favor the big players and eliminate all the small blogs etc), I do believe most users will favor to accept unobtrusive ads. The ones that don't can continue to use ABP as it is. Of course, nobody wants the wrong sites and ad-formats ending up on a whitelist, that's why we need clearly defined criteria which we can only get by starting this experiment. And as far as the integration of the checkbox is concerned, I think we should all trust Wladimir to do what makes most sense for the experiment as well as the users."
There should really be a "90s internet emulator" kids today can use. I get the feeling that lots of younger kids are growing up not really realizing how insane pop ups used to be, to the point where your computer was basically unusable and would often completely crash. So when someone like me takes a hard line against Netflix concepting higher subscriptions or ads, companies fighting against adblock, and generally hearing, "Bro its just 30 seconds bro just watch the ad bro its not so bad bro lol."
I just think to myself.. "if only you could see what I've seen.."
Yet consistently when a discussion about ads come up there will be a general vibe that, "Oh its just 5 seconds its not so bad. What kind of crazy person would blacklist a site because of a 5 second ad? Nutjobs!" ..well, me and many others like me.. So I show up and say that I do take a hardline view to ads.. I'd rather pay a bit more or change services completely if ads become invasive, flashing, or in any way disruptive to the experience of the content. Well they find that completely unreasonable and the downvotes reign down upon me like fiery blue arrows from the sky.
You may take my site.. but you'll never take, my freeeeedoooooooooooom!!! ^^^^^from ^^^^^ads
Footnote: I do white list ads on sites I support, and I do support AdBlock's movement to allow creative and non-invasive ads. You don't have to give someone epilepsy to get their attention if you are thoughtful and creative.
I was responding specifically to the 'nobody would opt-in' comment. If over 50% of people are happy with it then there should be no problem presenting it as an opt-in choice.
Something like 'do you want the application/extension you went out of your way to install specifically to block ads to allow ads from organizations we deem acceptable (i.e., the people giving us money)'
Have you seen the list of 'acceptable' ads? Fucking Taboola is on there for fucks sake.
Looks like Reddit and owners have bowed to their advertiser masters. This place will become a SJW/P.C. haven for people who want to live in an echo chamber; not that it wasn't already headed down that path long ago.
Just because you find something distasteful, emotionally hurtful, annoying, offensive, and/or stupid gives you no right to just outright censor the content for others, especially when this site has historically supported freedom of discussion and exchange of ideas. This is a fast track ride to the bottom.
I refuse to financially support such a site. I never have and will never buy gold. I use adblock, which I recommend everyone else use as well ( [link] ).
It's a sad and pathetic day when 4chan is a morally superior site for people who want to freely discuss and exchange ideas.