Block adblock

I don't block ads, my browser just doesn't support third party connections. Or javascript. Or css. Or images.

...

...

IPs don't convey that much informations
Current ads gather much more, for what we know even cookies or the broewser history, if all you see is an IP you only know an approximate location which is not much

I agree, but not every way to make an income is viable
This is especially true for small websites, since they are mostly unknown and they won't get much asking users, for example
The owner can use the money gotten from its daily job, but there is nothing wrong in a help from other sources
As I said, if the ad is just a picture with a link and nothing else, that would be an ethical way to do it, it's the same as loading a picture from the website itself
Obviously when the site is full of them that's an issue too, but that's a different matter

just switch off your javascript and their dumb script wont work.

unless the site itself requires javascript then what?

disclaimer: i didn't try this because i rarely "need" javascript.

but apparently their implementation of adblock blocking is simply a script which loads after everything else, detects the adblock and if it is detected, replace the page with some bullshit banner. therefore it's probably possible to set up some browser extension to filter out all references to their script before it has a chance to execute.

these faggots are just starting another arms race, they cannot win.

tested their example site

seems like ublock blocks blockadblock

I used to come here just to laugh at the retards who post here, but now it's just sad, not to mention dead.

Then don't use that site or block the specific script.

Go back to halfchan. Your attempt at psyops is what's sad.

Your brand of psyops is just as good as mine.

Brave is in the right. Acceptable ads that don't track you and a revenue stream that is user-redirectable to the sites that are worth it.

GTFO, adware shill scum. The correct course of action is to restructure ISP pricing.

Why do SJWs have the argumentative skills of small children?

WEW
media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8414-corporate_surveillance_digital_tracking_big_data_privacy
media.libreplanet.org/mgoblin_media/media_entries/1529/144_7_gerwith.webm
lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f3/

Fingerprinting and metadata doesn't convey that much information. What can they tell you about a person? All it proves is that the user at IP 4.4.2.2 uses Windows 10 and Firefox and all kinds of trivia about the user's browser.

Very simple to answer.
SJW and LGBT people shelter themselves from events that might disturb them.
People grow/gain experience from events even bad ones.
They argument like 10 year olds because they try to avoid any events that might be to hard for them instead of manning up and grow from their possible success or failure against the said events.

If it was only that, the natural selection model of Darwin would have made these people disappear a long time ago.
But instead of disappearing they try to change the rules and drag everyone they can in their safe space so that it becomes the new standard.
A standard of censor and mind altering reality.
That's why they are retarded and must be fought.

You haven't watched the links given.
Comes back after watching them please.

Ads are cancer and advertisers are scum.

Fake news exists because you can make money despite shit content by serving ads.

This. Ads always annoy me, but they started to piss off the movie with malware, auto playing videos, and ads that cover screen content, and just generally making browsing slow.

*movie->normie.

Neither of them.
It's literally like watching two children bicker in the sandbox.

At the current level of quality attention whores should be paying me to read their yellow journalism, not the other way around.

IPs do not have metadata
I've seen part of the video in the first link you posted, and it talks about websites, not IP packets
Of course websites have all sorts of metadata, you are even required to provide a user agent, but that's due to HTTP, not IP
If you send raw packets without the content being wrapped in another protocol that contains metadata, all one can see is two numbers (source and destination address) and infer some approximate location from them
If you use non-HTTP applications profiling you is harder, it would require other sources like GPS or credit card records

They create it indirectly
Any connection to any system creates metadata.
Good then be patient and continue.
Watch both videos.

whoever gets rid of the fucking ads

This.

Users should ALWAYS have more power than the curators of content. This isn't entitlement, its a fucking balance of power. Its the curators job to convince the user to support them. If ad blockers are making a serious dent in revenue then the curator needs to find a new way of making that revenue by convincing people they should be supported. This is the same case with software piracy. Copying is not theft.etc.etc

So they don't have it, ok
If you talk about pointing to a geographic location, I can agree, but normally they never give your exact position (I tested on my IP with some websites and they were always off by several kilometers, if it means anything), and it requires a lot of snooping on your address to find you just using IPs
It's not the same as using HTTP headers and javascript to get your browser history
False, it's possible to create a networks without a source-destination protocol, meaning the only information passing through the wire is the actual content, not who requested it or who has it
Wether it makes sense or is efficient is beyond this discussion
Tracking the flow of data to reach the source of the request is not metadata
If you mean "any system currently implemented in the real world", then you are correct, but in general your statement is false
It's not about patience, I didn't have a hour to spare
I'll watch them but in small intervals of time, not all in one go

But they do, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP_stack_fingerprinting and lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f3/
Not to mention that if even if ads were static images, your browser would download them via HTTP and therefore send HTTP headers.

Advertisers can go die in a fire.

You want to bitch and complain about revenue then I'll just leave, fuck it. You want to talk about morals I've seen adons installed on incompetent users computers that will feed them a popup ad every other click. Is it immoral if I don't install that add on from your site? What about blocking/wiping cookies? Is that immoral too because ad companies use it to track my personal life? Am I a bad person for tweaking my browser to reject as much 3rd party trash as physically possible? Must be really immoral to block malicious user harming scripts or use Tor and similar service. I'm probably a bad person for putting my number on a do not call list as well. Oh the humanity. How could you not subject yourself to the ads. Muh poor buzzfeed and cnn

kek

y
e
s

I like how he side-steps the use tracking complaints.

wew.

Their site just keeps telling me to turn off my adblocker even when I turn it off and refresh.

>go to blockadblock.com/
How do they do it even though i have ublock origin and umatrix?

uBlock Origin, the dev is far more radical that these two clowns

I just hope this catches on because it's essentially self-sabotage.

...
I repeat myself.
Before posting please watch them.
You would waste less time posting and I too would spend less time
Understood take the necessary time when possible but please don't post before.

>, see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP_stack_fingerprinting and lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f3/
This
Much this
Advertising was never something vital to the web.
For what I know It's funny to see that the ones who complain about blocking ads are getting fundings from the government and still complain they don't have money.

Nice to see another umtrix user.
Please consider to change you configuration to something similar to this (pic related.
Bootstrap, cloudflare etc... on your image have gathered your IP and website you visited via the css.
The website you go on has the IP per default (and knows that you have visited it (obviously))
but you can restrain the third parties from letting them know that.

You can make general rule if you select the name of the domain and then select the "*" that will appear.
The "*" means that you make general rule.
I use the white list method instead of the while list.
It's much more powerful that way.
You just have to validate what needs to be so that the website works (honestly these website aren't worth it in general).

Let the 1st party green and remove "css" and "image" from green to neutral (neither red or green)

If x isn't loaded that means it's blocked thus meaning that you have an adblocker (it's retarded and will soon be included in the µblock origin anti adblocker list)

Forgot the other pics

shit

html5?

you can bypass it if you use links

kek
Their shit filtering systems only applies to specific webpages and not entire websites.
Anyway these people are pieces of shit.
Like always the privacy policy is vague and permits shit tons of reselling.
See for example on
blockadblock.com/adblocking/blockadblock-com-privacy-policy/
so if you affiliate with oracle it's ok because they affiliate with you ?

Aka

Yeah and ?
So you don't collect credit card.
That doesn't mean you don't collect anything else.
Of course it isn't it's stored on oracle servers.

pic related
web.archive.org/web/20160521023159/http://blockadblock.com:80/blockadblock_basic_script.php

After 10 seconds a CSS animation hides the page as a fallback. Google AMP does the same in reverse: if you have JS disabled you get a blank page for 8 seconds.

This is nonsense. "curl shitty.site/" will not load it but is not an adblocker.

it's not a matter of who's right, it's an arms race that anti-adblock's lost

How do they make css that only applies after an amount of time?

Please kill yourself Javascript inventor.

They're both wrong; ads are always fucking cancer. There's no such thing as "acceptable" advertisement.

You can host the ads on your own server instead of linking to the advertiser's servers.

Thanks for keeping this dead board so pathetic

CSS transition-delay

They're both wrong.

BlockAdblock intentionally makes the user experience shitty and ignores the impact that adblocking users, a tiny minority of their users, make on total views of their website.

Adblock acts like a mafia, forcing companies to pay protection money to get unblocked. This is not only a scummy business model but also ignores their mission statement of encouraging responsible advertising methods.

"Entitlement alert," says the software company that believes certain websites are entitled to revenue despite doing things that alienate their users. No business is entitled to survive. The world will not miss "real news" like the New York Times any more than it would miss Pets.com.

If they want money so badly, they'd recognize Internet ads as a dying business and try a different revenue model. Even if ad blocking disappeared overnight, they'd still be failing because the efficacy of internet ads is awful and ad clients are catching on. From now on, we can expect either paywalls, donations/patronage, or maybe sharing the burden of hosting via new distributed Internet technologies.

Ads don't belong on the Internet.
Ads don't belong in the theatres.
Ads don't belong on cable TV.

I PAID GOOD MONEY FOR THIS SERVICE YOU OBNOXIOUS GREEDY CARTEL FUCKS. YOU CAN RAM YOUR ADS UP YOUR ASSHOLE.

This

and also this
=====
and also if a site tells me to unblock their ads, I won't visit.
fuckem.

blockadblock, honestly. If I do the work required to set up a site, and the site gets visitors, I'm entitled to recieve payment for my services. That users are slimy fucks who wouldn't give a penny to anything that isn't mcdonalds or pornhub means I have to go through the other route to get the money that I quite frankly earned. If you're not willing to pay for high-quality, well-produced content, then you deserve to be mined and shilled at and lose all forms of privacy for using resources you believe you're entitled to, but have contributed to in no way.

Remember, ads are first and foremost the user's fault. If users had simply not been greedy, ads would never have made a blip on the radar, much less become the sole means by which sites support themselves. But you couldn't, you wouldn't, and now you're paying the price, you goddamn idiots.

0.0002 shekels have been delivered to your account.

I appreciate the support.

That's what you get for trying to be nice.

And that's what you get when you bareback with advertisers.

How about delete your site, shitnozzle.

Flattr had the right idea but it's implemented way too shittily there.

People should be able to pay $10-$20 a month to disable all Ad Bullshit on the entire Internet and all webmasters should opt in for their slice based on who visits where.

But this should be a bottom-up consortium driven process so some shitrag at the top doesn't take all the profits.

Basically webmasters need to get their shit together, recognize their mutual economic interests, and solve the problem with a universal membership system.

Nobody's gonna side with the adblock killer cuck.

Made it too obvious

People need to keep in mind that the internet doesn't fucking need the money grubbing jews in order to exist.

Before everything started to get centralized on a few websites and huge networks, a lot of people used to host shit on their private site in a quasi blog manner (before blogs were a thing), and people were fine with this. You could still find plenty of shit on the internet and people were happy to contribute even if they didn't get paid. The internet *works* perfectly fine without these huge organizations that demand they get revenue from ads and call you entitled for deciding what to run on your own personal computer.

Regarding payment, ads have obviously always been a thing, but it started to get much worse later on when web ads started to get more and more organized and they started bundling malware in them.

So easy to spot the millenials

Does anyone know of a script that detects if the browser has HTML5, JS, WebSockets, WebRTC, DRM or HTTP2 enabled and deny access to my site if it has?

...

How do you even ethically earn money on the web, huh?
Placing ads on your content is really bad even if it's just a still image hosted on your server!
Recieving donations is even worse because you're supporting the Richard Stallman's communism+ where nobody's working but everyone's getting paid!
Putting your content behind a paywall is the worst of them all!

See

Just Spotify the whole "paywall" Internet, but do it through a consortium so the content creators get their share (everything), not some Silicon Valley startup that "mediates" pays peanuts.

People will pay for content, they just hate being nickel and dimed on every site.

But is it ethically OK to ask for donations if your product is free?
For example, many people would rather prefer to spend their life developing free software than work for some evil organization.

of course it is.

I don't blame the people putting ads on their websites. They're just trying to survive. It's sad that it takes mind-controlling ads to do that, but that's what it is. We need money to survive in this world currently, and the solution is for that to not be the case. I mean, it will have to happen eventually, since robots will be taking job after job. It's our choice if it is sooner or later. If it's too late, it might lead to depopulation and a takeover of the planet by a few rich people.

Pleases kill yourself before you accidentally breed

...

Telecommunications was hobbyist shit for a long time and it was great, faggot. There's no argument here. It's been done and can be done again.

what's the matter, goy? Less than a third of the website is adds, isn't that generous?

Maybe the anti-adblock crowd will have a leg to stand on when there are ads that are both nonintrusive to web content and nonintrusive to my privacy. Until then ads can suck my GNU/cock.

I'm going to assume this is a joke or bait, if only to preserve my sanity.

Hobbyist internet is possible but not sustainable if a single person loses interest in the project or runs into hard times. Donations or sharing the burden of hosting are better options for this content than ads.

what's so new with this new revolutionary adblock killer?
scriptblocker and element hider removes all kinds of anti adblock that I have seen

Exactly. The way www works is sending us the source code and let the browser interpret the contents.

How the fuck do normal people use the internet? Tried watching youtube without adblock once and every fucking video had a 10 second ad before it, it's worse than fucking tv.

Capitalist apologists, capitalism permits ads, capitalism makes this shit a thing, fucking money needs to be abolished.

...

It's complete madness. They just watch them. They sit there and watch the advertisements. They don't even, like, go to another tab and do something else while the advertisement plays. They actually sit there and WATCH IT.

i find it interesting how these sites don't want you wasting their money on their bandwidth so they use their money & bandwidth to direct you to a page telling you to disable adblock...

I've heard Google is implementing their own adblock into Chrome... which, you know what that means... Basically yes, the ads will be gone -- the ads of their competitors, and you will still be tracked.

Loading their shit page with thousand of scripts most likely requires a lot of bandwidth

No, that's not how it is at all.

I mean, yes, Google ads won't be blocked, but they're targeting annoying ads, not ads from competitors in general.

What's funnier is that you can adjust the amount of ads as the content creator, I've seen obscure shitty podcasts where it's 1-2 hours long and there's an ad every 5 minutes. Fucking 24 ads it's hilarious that anyone would sit through that

blockadblock solves no issues at all. Rather than dealing with the problem of obnoxious fucking ads they just force you to deal with it. The only fucking people that would use such a moronic service are moneygrubbers that don't deserve your money in the first place.

Of course the result isn't that people grit their teeth and bare it, instead they just go to another site. Sites that use anti-ablock shit are actually losing money. I know a lot of people that use adblockers specifically so they don't have to deal with a million pop-ups when they work the wiggler, and they don't block anything else. That's the main adblock demographic, not the people like us that block everything because their autism makes the unseemly sight of ads drive them into a rage.

hell it sounds like the blockadblock guys are doing what they do solely for the sake of being a bunch of contrarians.

lel

And there we know you're an underage faggot who wasn't even born then.

...

Brought to you by the same geniuses who disable right click to stop people "stealing" websites.

What.

Hey, yeah, protip; since I keep seeing replies like this recently (maybe its all the same retard or maybe its just summer) but the single word "What." replies are infuriating as fuck and nobody wants to help you with your low-effort shit

ok

That's why they made third party download tools, user

that's pointless because if I want to, I'll use browser dev tools and get everything I want anyway.

ads are dying.

subscription fees are the future.

Why not just block everything in your hosts file instead of relying on browser extensions and add ons?

...

Yeah, it was done to "protect" the source code. If you were an idiot and thought you had some special "secret sauce" code you would disable right-clicking or make it so that right-clicking would open an alert message. It was entirely pointless because you could just use the browser's developer tools to get anything you want. It's like putting up a roadblock made of cardboard, it's so useless that it's not even worth the effort of putting it up.

Gonna keep using adblockers as long as the faggots running the site don't screen their ads and simply let shady ad providers put literally anything on there.

Fuck that, I'm always right. I use the browsers I like (Lynx and Links) and if their webshit doesn't work, then I'm outa there.

github.com/reek/anti-adblock-killer
LOL

but but I need all your information to give you good ads! Run my scripts dammit!

...

Not as long as your scripts are non-free. I will always block them until you liberate your scripts.

I bet you think the web must be inclusive and social-justice friendly.

Oy vey comrade!

Good luck finding one when the main browser was either Internet Explorer 4 or Netscape Navigator 4.01. People actually thought, back then, that disabling the right-click functionality would stop you from copy-pasting stuff.

Then they got real smart and started overriding Ctrl + C too, to stop those rascal hackers who were getting around their anti-theft script.

The Web 1.0 was a magical place.

They can't even admit that they're not just showing ads, but also feeding off analytics software (and that's the main problem, alongside obnoxious/browser breaking ads). Why do you fuckers need to track even where I hover the mouse in your ad-ridden page? Fuck off.

user capitalism is the reason why this shit exists. Everyone complaining about juicers and anti-adblockers for useless fucking products shilled by californian start ups, but this is the direct result of a society whose entire goal is to pile money. I will never understand Holla Forumsacks, you see the problems but for some reason you can't take the 2 inch leap to see the solution.

polite sage and dub dubs checked

...

Fucking ad kikes, I swear. They aren't entitled to my personal information, battery life, bandwidth cap, my CPU time, ear-rape me, or infect me with malware. It's ironic that this particular kike is making money from ad kikes himself.
Static text or banner ads, I can tolerate, or better yet, no ads at all.

with the advent of obfuscated JS, web 'apps', and soon binary webpages, that's about to end.

It's only started to be shilled recently (this thread included, fuck you OP).

What a preposterously retarded idea. No one's gonna register and fork over billing info and money for each obscure website they get linked to.
If anything, paywalls are gonna lead to web 'piracy'.

It's not a direct consequence of capitalism per se. It's a consequence of greed and an unhinged pursuit of profit without the slightest regard for users.
You can have capitalism without the latter, but in practice that's usually not the case.

And what exactly is that? Poor economic management combined with a nanny state controlling everything for the sake of (((equality)))? Capitalism is shit but I fail to see the "solution." you meme commies are always bitching about capitalism but fail to acknowledge that significant portions of the problems we have would still exist under most political philosophies. Besides most of is easily avoidable now anyways. blockadblock has already been negated by several tools listed in the thread so who gives a shit

meant to reference this

If a company can't provide a service without - incredibly shitty, insecure, bloated - ads, then perhaps their service isn't very good or needed.

are these people retarded?

People subscribed to Fox won't care what's on the CNN subscription.

ads must die.

>Ads are a possible source of income*

*ad revenue heavily relies on size of website and ending auction price

Because nobody remembers when FBI/Alphabet crashed ad prices with AdSense, making banner ads virtually unfeasible for scaled websites.

Link heavily related 4 supplemental reading:
yasha.harari.org/shmog/how-spam-and-google-effectively-ruined-the-internet-for-millions-of-publishers-and-other-people/

no one because the web is a piece of shit and needs to die in the first place.
that aside it's technically retarded to implement such measures.
also anything that can't be viewed in links is utter shit, the trash of the trash, and can fuck off (and most likely isn't worth viewing in the first place)
also:
sage for homo reddit-tier topic

Feels good, doesn't it?

Gas the kikes, of course.

Well society owns the government and we vote on laws to be passed, I fail to see how a populace majority deciding to take collective action is a "nanny" state, especially if its positive. You can't complain about "kikes" stealing your data and bandwidth when you don't want to prohibit them from doing so.

...

Wtf? I don't think this script might not be respecting my freedoms
gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.en.html

Isn't this what cable TV was supposed to be?

...

...

>Such programs ought to be free, but CSS is not a serious problem for users' freedom as of 2016.
Ganoo people confirmed for retarded.

Exactly. People who publish stuff on the web because they love what they do, have no need to get ad revenue. I remember when I made my first website (I'd write very detailed walkthroughs of games I liked, with screenshots, stats, shop tables, etc. - think of the Earthbound hint book), back in the mid-90s. I had no idea that you could make money on the internet - I did it all because I loved games, I loved writing, and I had enough time to do both. That some people ended up appreciating what I was doing and even wrote me was an amazing feeling on itself. I was happy to pay ten bux a month to keep the site ad-free (banner ads were starting to become annoying around that time, and popups were already a cancer). it helped me to learn HTML, CSS, JS and Perl, because I edited everything by hand. I never had the need to shove up ads on my little website, even when I developed a somewhat sizeable audience and the money could have been welcome. That allowed me to only post stuff when I felt like it, which in return made me willing to keep the thing up for years until I had no more time to do so, instead of feeling obligated to do it and getting bored pretty quickly.

They're just butthurt because Douglas Crockford makes fun of their instance on free software and doesn't want to give in their demands on JSLint's license.

You don't understand what that does. The visited selector is a browser thing and it doesn't transmit that information anywhere outside of the local profile. If you reset your browser history, it loses all that information that is stored solely in your profile and is not transmitted anywhere.

I use umatrix because of its ability to control the scripts on a domain basis. The neat side effect is that ads don't work any more.

Directly, no, but CS can define rules based on it to, let's say, load extra stuff (that can compromise privacy) based on it.

If you care about privacy, then why are you running non-free software in the form of non-free Javascript programs?

You can make spyware completely free and open-source and people will still run it.

I just wanna say that if there are sits that are cunts about me having adblock, and do not let my view content with adblock, I just click the back button. There are enough sites that also have that information.

Yes, same thing with ClotFlare captchas. Waste of energy.

...

Is my shit configured wrong? Theoretically if the site works in a text browser it should work with all this shit disabled and just display the fucking page. Or is it that by default it doesn't display the page and requires javascript to generate the page so you're forced to run their shitty software? Not that I care much because I don't really use any websites that use this type of web 2.0 bullshit are run by megakikes.

Why the fuck wouldn't it be? That's what a fucking donation is. Do you not understand English? A donation is a completely voluntary I-give-you-money-and-ask-for-nothing-in-return transaction. I like your website because you're actually a good fucking guy and make good shit, therefore I want you to not starve and to continue making shit, so I give you my money to ensure that you don't starve and hope that you make enough to continue making shit. If you don't tell anyone, I even sometimes buy shit after I pirate it, or pirate shit after I buy it. If something is truly good enough, I want to give people money, I just want unlimited access too.

Oh, I see. The css animation unhides the page for 10 seconds then rehides it. If you block the animation you can't see shit. But you can still just delete that node and keep reading anyway :^).

I install ublock origin on the computers of every normie I know, with their consent or not.
I wish I could see how many shekels I made the www jew lose.

I shiggy.

I was actually forced to install an ad and script blocker on every laptop I've had. Without it, shitty ads and bloated JS would slow everything down to a crawl. Battery life improved too as an added bonus.
We're in sad times.

In the age of patreon, who even cares about ads anymore?

Really triggers my PTSD or is it nostalgia?

youtube.com/watch?v=h5JgqVzNWEA&list=PL8DC8796A4B8AA8DA

great point, coudn't of said it better myself.

So either you're a special snowflake faggot that thinks he's not a millennial, even though you are, or you're a pathetic oldfuck that spends time on 8ch of all places, or you're underage b& and therefore a huge faggot. So which one are you?

In his defense, it's true that socialist countries didn't have ads, mostly because you didn't have a choice anyway. Lada stronk!

Come on dude, you know how expensive it is to commission high quality/shaded furry art

>media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8414-corporate_surveillance_digital_tracking_big_data_privacy
based, i was gonna post this but you already did
Direct link to webm:
cdn.media.ccc.de/congress/2016/webm-hd/33c3-8414-eng-deu-Corporate_surveillance_digital_tracking_big_data_privacy_webm-hd.webm
Highly recommend anyone to watch this.
It's insane how widespread mass corporate surveillance is

Everybody. Companies have the right to show ads, people have the right to block them, and companies have the right to block those adblockers. It's a struggle, but in general, the consumers usually have an edge because they have sympathy from a larger group.

Imagine if billboards didn't have any regulations limiting how big or annoying they could be, or where you could put them. There would be billboards blasting music at you at uncomfortable levels, taking up miles of roadway, and built to sync with your radio and play an ad interrupting your music. That's basically the state of internet ads now, but they also have no power against us blocking them, so they have to try to work around it.
Never stop blocking ads. It's a broken revenue model and it deserves to die. Let people figure out a better way to stay afloat. If I end up having to donate or pay specifically for good content in order to avoid adverts, I'll do it. At least for now we have regulations that advertisements have to be clearly labeled as ads, otherwise every ad would be a shill or astroturf. At least shills and astroturfs today aren't being used as a "legitimate" argument to keeping websites afloat. Imagine a company trying to push that. "I know that I'm using fake consumers to trick you into thinking that it's a good product, but something's got to pay the bills!" Nobody would eat that shit up.

Depends on the viability of what you're offering. Plenty of "do-it-for-free" people get by on donations. Online musicians do, Toady does with Dwarf Fortress, plenty of programmers do. If your website isn't getting by on donations, people don't care enough whether it stays up to pay money for it, and it's therefore not economically viable.
The only real solution is to allow people to very easily donate very small amounts of money daily to websites they like (something like a penny or two a day). The way it is only requires ads because spending money is a huge ordeal. Bitcoins could have been a solution if it took of in a very big way. Many people don't want to see ads, and would be willing to donate to sites they like, but they only want to donate a very small amount. Nobody want to drop their debit card number to send somebody 50 cents, so they just don't.

Advertisements don't exist because nobody wants to pay for content, because that is countered by everything we know about economics. Advertisements exist because money isn't fluid enough in this area to facilitate the amount that people want to pay for the content.
Again, it's not that everybody "wants to get something for free", it's that the amount that they want to pay for it is inconvenient to actually make it worth the effort to pay in the first place. A donation model on a website is only viable with either a big enough audience or if somebody had a secure solution to making transactions on the internet easier (like Bitcoins are supposed to be).

IIRC the CSS is greatly restricted in regards to the .visited selector to mitigate those attacks

Some states actually made those illegal.

your loss

for what purpose

there are patreons today, which fixes everything

non-js torposter here, how did they manage this?
files.catbox.moe/zm3gib.png

can someone explain this script?

can someone explain this script?

It is purposefully obfuscated so nobody can read it. In other words, they rely on people not knowing how it works.

uBlock seems to get past 100 percent of these anti adblock things

I actually use lynx.

Take this homo shit back to reddit. Fuck your stupid pretend ethical dilemma. If you unironically view ads you have brain damage. If you're viewing sites with ads enabled you're wasting fuck tons of CPU to view them and is probably the reason your browser freezes every second. Almost no site with ads is worth viewing in the first place. Hell, almost no site that requires JS to work is worth anything in the first place.

I use adblock to deprive luegenpresse websites of their revenue

Ahahaha that's fucking rich

Neither are right. Adblock coerces companies into paying protection money for adblock bypass. And anti adblock are greedy bleeding heart kikes who think it's acceptable to force corporate propaganda upon your viewers

You didn't pay for the content on the internet, including what you are reading right now

The cost of theater tickets includes a discount for the ten or so minutes of advertisement

Yeah Cable TV is shit

Who owns the bandwidth that I pay for?

lmao stay mad corporate cucks with your ad-infested shit sites

Agree with what adblock is saying but they sold out a long time ago. Now you pay them to have your ads whitelisted.

Fake news only live thanks to ads
so fuck you anti adblock

use this
jsbeautifier.org/

this. only sane comment i've seen on the "le adblock ethics" discussions of 2015+

I can't think of a decent and legit site which uses blockadblock.

it is usually some warez blog or something which frankly is built off of stealing content.

or some shitty regional newspaper which bombards you with 100000000000 ads.

if it is a decent website with decent ads i will whitelist them.

however adfly linking russian warez boards can go fuck themselves if they think im not gonna block their malvertising ads.

kys

They are using an outdated, 5 years old Apache server.

Would be a shame if someone were to exploit it :3

"Minifying" scripts is based on the (reasonable) assumption that bandwidth is valuable. They then go and rape this assumption to death by loading up 1080p background images and putting all of their website's content over the top of it.

cve**de**tails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-45/product_id-66/Apache-Http-Server.html

Normal people are cattle, they exist only to serve the chosen people.
They are subservient to appeals to morality and appeals to authority "If the site owner makes me do X i will do it and not question it because hes a magic person that runs the Internet and shieet"
If they think that you're above them in anyway they will treat you like a god.
They will sit there and be treated like crap by site owners and just accept it.
They do not try to fix their situation at all.
They just accept all the shit they are given.

That being said you still need to provide them with something that feeds their base instincts.
Porn/Video Games/Memes/

If you're really smart, you can make them upload all this content themselves and simply provide the cheap bandwidth while pumping the site full of ads

okay...

For an educated user, they can open up firefox's debugger console and when the script shows up they can manually filter it out.

This, I stopped watching TV entirely because why should I be subjected to 15-20 minutes of ads in between 5-10 minutes of content that I've already paid for? It's essentially a subscription fee to watch ads and being rewarded with sprinkles of actual entertainment for making them more money, like paying to eat someone's shit and occasionally finding an undigested corn kernel while advertisers pay that person for every turd I have to swallow.
Theaters too, it costs fucking $20 for the "theater experience". $10 for a fucking ticket, and another $10-$15 for a drink, popcorn, and maybe a box of candy so you hear your shoes sticking to the floor as you walk to the good seats and if you're there before the movie starts you gotta sit through a stream of advertisements.
Advertisements are EVERYWHERE, there is not a single fucking place you can go where you WONT see ads all over the place, and they have the audacity to cry about lost revenue when people block their malware infested auto-play movie ads that install toolbars on every idiot's browser that I have to keep uninstalling every time I get called to fix their shit.
Advertisers are not entitled to my personal data just because they are a business, they're not entitled to installing adware and malware on every idiot's computer, they're not entitled to burdening paying customers with time consuming ads during movies and tv shows.
Advertisers can get fucked, they already plaster their fucking ads all over physical, and digital world and then cry how WE'RE entitled because we don't want them beaming ads directly into our fucking brains while we sleep, oh wait they already tried that on public transport by making the glass vibrate so that anyone asleep with their skull against the window would hear it.
I pay my internet subscription fee, it is not my responsibility to ensure websites get revenue by wasting my bandwidth and slowing my web surfing experience with malicious scripts and video ads, it is the responsibility of the site owner to ensure they can pay for their own damn bandwidth, and if they can't support themselves by selling product then they have to convince me that their site is worth my time and money. None of that "subscribe to get rid of ads!" shit, I want to be put on a pedestal and worshiped for giving them my shekels.
They are scum and their ads are not worth my spit on their boots.

rule34hentai pretty much does exactly this, and is why I have no qualms about blocking their ads and disabling scripts, which they just recently added the adblock killer shit to

There are so many videos that have an ad at the beginning, middle, and end. I don't have to sit through that shit normally but if I plug my puppylinux flash drive in anywhere, seamonkey doesn't block them and it's the only exposure I've had to ads in years.

Capitalism is a shit system in which too much undue trust is put into corporations with the notion that "Free market will fix it!"
Communism is a shit system in which too much undue trust is put into government with the notion that "Governments can be trusted!"
Socialism suggests that the fundamental problem of inequality can be fixed by simply taking money from those who earn more and distributing it to those who earn less or nothing, but never addresses the issue that creates this inequality to begin with.

Given the opportunity, an advertiser would gladly crawl right up your asshole just so he could show you ads while you brush your teeth. Then, perturbed by your not wanting to be violated, would denounce your lack of enthusiasm as "entitlement".

Oh, cool. How much will you pay if a malicious ad served through your site causes damage to my operating system or personal data?

Face it, you're scum and the only thing you're entitled to is a baseball bat to your face.

I like fake news so I support AdBlock. Though I use uBlock.

Just from the way they talk you KNOW they're just virtue signaling for the SJWs

Wouldn't you say that ads actually serve the lowest common denominator and encourage clickbait?

If I were webmaster, I'd detect adblock and thank the user for keeping my view-to-click ratio on my ads high (as adblock users tend to never click ads if they do show through).

It would be reverse psychology.

I think someone needs to fork uBlock Origin, insert code to detect an "anti-adblock," and if detected it requests the page loads some hundreds or thousands of times in the background. Effectively, it'd be a crowd-sourced DDoS of sites which implement anti-adblock.

The message should be clear: either get profitable some other way with adblock users, or shut your doors you fail both business and internet.

I don't block ads to fuck with webmasters, I block ads to preserve my privacy.

I block ads for all reasons, including that African muslim girls get raped in the Sahara.

But uBlock Origin already has anti-adblocker stuff.

I mean a component to punish anti-adblocker websites. Did you miss that part?

I work for a large online ad-serving company. I don't give a fuck if you use adblock (I use it, even on my workstation in the office), because the future in profitable online advertising is native advertising.

Huh?

It means that, at times, the content itself will be the ad. That favorite YouTube eceleb of yours? Well that video 3 weeks ago where she did that cool aluminium can experiment with Coke cans was actually bought by Coca-Cola for $12K; and while most of it was organic, key parts were well scripted, such as when she opened her soda nonchalantly and took a sip at the end, and the 4 old-timey Coca-Cola memorabilia on the walls and dresser of her room I'm sure you didn't notice (because she wore a low-cut in the video). Yea, that's something like "Native Advertising."

I'd have no problem with ads if they weren't the single biggest point of failure for privacy on the internet, and if they didn't bloat up every website to the point where my browser will freeze if I don't block them.

...

This video legitimately just piqued my interest in marketing. It is a MemeMagician's profession.

His mannerisms remind me of Alex Jones for some reason.

In a sense, is right. Native advertising is an ad embedded in the content you consume. Very egregious examples of native advertising are basically shilling. However, the company I work for doesn't do that kind of native advertising.

You know when you're searching for an item on a webstore, and you get your results, the top 2-3 say something like "featured items" or "sponsored content" next to them? That's also native advertising. It's native in the sense that they ads are loaded by the website, not a third party. You can't block them, but they're also not intrusive (they look like search results, not banner ads) and they're at least relevant to what you're searching for at the time.

WTF, I thought they were just dudes who really like coca cola.

Guess these guys didn't get paid though!

Another reason to block ads is to protect your brain and your mind.

Hear me out!
Ads subconsciously influence you, mold your mind. They make you believe stuff. You see a young woman with make up drinking Pepsi while wearing skimpy clothing and you start thinking "the type of woman who drinks pepsi is a young slut". This is a mere example, yet there are more dire situations imaginable.
There is a war for your mind. Such influences upon our thoughts and our thinking patterns are extremely damaging.

You niggers really never learn, do you

It's loaded by the website you're visiting. The only way to block the ad is to not load the page at all.

What have you ever bought after seeing an advertisement on a webpage you were viewing?

Double protection

I don't think I can agree. I think ads don't influence me.

But that's not the outcome.

i pretend it is and it works fine enough

get out jew
movie tickets go up and up and up because silly goyim will still pay to see cuckking 3

if you were doing anything worth wile you would be making money off of it and not off of running invasive ads that people hate

IDK how people can stand being advertised to it makes me fucking sick

average smooth brain zombie who "just ignores ads"
"i dont care i just ignore them"
"some of the commercials are funny !! "
you prob buy loto tickets looser

Why can't burgers into comedy?

wut?

then you are either an anti-self-awareness normalfag, or a paid shill
thelastpsychiatrist.com/2011/11/luxury_branding_the_future_lea.html

Who are you quoting though?

What?