Ok... Quick poll. If you had to pick one. Would you choose ads on legitimate sites? Or, would you allow them to mine cryptocurrency in your browser with permission with no ads? Lets say <10% CPU.
Adblocker detection is easily defeated. Your "pay without spending money" argument is nonsense. You're paying by letting hostile code from sketchy sources run in your browser where it's one exploit away from compromising everything.
-
-
"Without even noticing it" is bullshit too. Even if no malicious code runs, you notice the ad or the miner by your battery dying after 3 hours instead of 8 hours.
-
The poll was about < 10% of the CPU power. If you're sane, you run it in a web worker that runs in another thread so it won't affect page performance. And browsers, at least Chrome throttle background tabs so even if you leave the tab open...
-
None of that mitigates battery consumption, nor does it mitigate ux issues from cpu load. You're talking about stuff you have no understanding of.
-
Whatever you say. The fact is, in the future, you're going to have 3 choices: - mining - ads - paying for your content The content creators need to get paid. Most people (according to analytics) don't want to pay with money. Which is why there are alternative methods.
-
And 4. Continuing to miner-block and adblock.
-
Look what
@Forbes does. Adblock turned on, you're just not getting that first pageview. Surely you can turn it back on (which is what I do) immediately after the page has loaded. There's going to be an useless war between adblockers and content creators, which no one will win. -
Last I checked Forbes articles load fine for me. I never turn off adblock. Yes there will be an endless war, but it's not useless. The alternative (giving up) is rampant malware and tracking destroying security, privacy, and democracy.
-
Guess your adblock is better than mine then :') What's the talk on destroying democracy, if something rustles your mindset, just go to another source of content. And don't forget the God Damn Privacy Laws, or GDPR. They should help with privacy.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
If done properly, when the application code detects that you aren't paying and the ads are showing, it simply tells the server to stop serving any content, how do you defeat that? Is the average user going to bother trying? Nope. They just turn off adblock.
-
Stop serving content to all 10000 users behind the same carrier-grade-NAT ip?
-
Nah, just those who send a particular cookie. That'll stop most script kiddies. The rest are just too smart to go around any client side blocks. Users like you and me probably. The thing is, if the number of users who do that grows too big, everything is going to be paywall'd.
-
Adblockers just need to automate blocking that cookie. Future browsers will not even support cookies except on sites you opt-in to having a persistent context on. Only reason ads have any leverage is that browsers made lots of design mistakes. They will be fixed.
-
And when the cookie block day comes, expect to see a lot of "hey uh we need to you to log in and because our system is legacy, it needs cookies" style popups. And there's always IndexedDB, localStorage and so on that you can send manually. Cookies just tend to go automatically.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Sketchy sources? Pretty sure you can host the miner code yourself, and audit what it does.
-
Sketchy from the point of view of the user, not the publisher. Why should I trust that the publisher did any research to confirm that it's safe? Spoiler: they didn't.
-
Depends on the publishers developers ethics. I certainly do.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.