Skip to content

Adblockers stop publishers serving ads to (or even seeing) 1bn web users - Press Gazette

Technology
339 203 141
  • They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.

    Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.

    Maybe if they didn’t use very intrusive ads people would not install ad-blockers so much

    Many websites put a video playing in later in top of the text, with another layer of ads and tiny space to read… the website would be unreadable without ad-blocks

  • “And Scott Messer, founder of publishing adtech consultancy Messer Media, added: “Dark traffic is unlike anything we have seen before. It’s demonetising publisher content at scale without user consent.

    “Publishers already face an existential-level threat in the face of AI reducing referral traffic. This is another slice that publishers cannot afford to lose.””

    The quote is even worse when you take this snippet from above:

    The study discovered that the majority of users did not choose to block ads, with ad-blocking technology often activated by a third-party like their employer at a network level, their educational institution, security software they installed, or public Wi-Fi networks. For example ad-blocking tech can be bundled with VPNs (virtual private networks that hide a web user’s location) and built into browsers like BRave and Duck Duck Go. There are also dedicated apps and cross-platform brands such as AdGuard which describes itself as “the world’s most advanced ad blocker” that can “even” block on Youtube.

    So they are trying to frame corporate security policies as "no consent". Which totally does not make sense as the contract the worker signed is consent for corporate IT to manage the computer and also to secure it against malware serves via ads. And to even suggest that users who are using a VPN with built in adblock or an alternative browser do not want to use the features the software they installed come with, is crap

  • Maybe if they didn’t use very intrusive ads people would not install ad-blockers so much

    Many websites put a video playing in later in top of the text, with another layer of ads and tiny space to read… the website would be unreadable without ad-blocks

    @DarkSideOfTheMoon @1984 and all this additional JavaScript and Elements and makes the side's just horrible slow. Compare this with CSS+HTML only sides omg how good they can feel ... I also prefer nowadays text mode browsers again, cause a good readable font + focus on what is important ... the content itself. I really get pissed if websites with public content can't be run anymore without javascript (wtf is up with you guys ?) ....

  • The tech community is pacified into not taking action against the polluters by our adblockers because we don't see the egregious ads and so we don't fight the good fight for the user.

    Ad blockers are the fight. Those users who can't be bothered to learn a bit about the devices they spend so much time on aren't owed anything.

    What does "fighting the good fight" even look like to you in this context, anyways?

  • They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.

    Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.

  • This is easily solved by not using 3rd parties and tracking data for ads. If the ad was just part of the page (similar to an ad in the newspaper) then ad blockers would not be able to detect them at all. A YouTuber saying "before we get started, this video is sponsored by [relevant related company]" does not get blocked by ad blockers.

    However, in order to do that websites would be responsible for the ads they display. If they don't do their due diligence they won't be able to pass it off as "we're not responsible for it, it's our ad company that put it there." They don't want to be responsible for the ads they show, but they want you to be responsible for the ads you don't watch.

    A YouTuber saying "before we get started, this video is sponsored by [relevant related company]" does not get blocked by ad blockers.

    Well, there's sponsor block which uses crowd sourced timestamps to skip those segments, but yeah you're right.

  • Ads in the 90's and 00's would just layer toolbars onto your browser. Is still have a a nervous twitch when I see a thick toolbars or animated cursors.

    The toolbars came from scam software on the '90s. Ads being able to install things came well into the '00s.

  • They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.

    Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.

    25 years of adblockers and that is the single most important thing that keeps me from cutting myself off the web.
    I've donated money to adblockers and will continue to do so until I die!
    I send emails to the web sites that ask me to remove the blocker to tell them I will not and that there are many other sites that welcome my adblocking ass!

  • “The growth of dark traffic undermines the ability of publishers to fund the production of quality content, or even operate as a business. We must recognise users are not the main driver causing this.”

    And Scott Messer, founder of publishing adtech consultancy Messer Media, added: “Dark traffic is unlike anything we have seen before. It’s demonetising publisher content at scale without user consent.

    Are they trying to present it as if poor innocent users need to be protected from the vile ad blockers?

    Definitely. They are likely laying the groundwork to make using an adblocker a criminal offense.

  • the big turning point I remember was a combo of popups and interstitial ads

    Popups we all know and hate as they still exist and are disgusting. They were obviously gross and ate up ram and stole focus and shit

    But the interstitial ads were also gross. You’d click a link and then get redirected to an ad for 10 seconds and then redirected to content. Or a forum where the first reply was replaced with an ad that was formatted to look like a post

    Like adblocking was a niche thing prior to the advertising industry being absolute scumbags. The original idea that allowing advertising to support free services like forums and such wasn’t horrible, put a banner ad up, maybe a referral link, etc. but that was never enough for the insidious ad industry. Like every other domain they’ve touched (television, news, nature, stores, cities, clothing, games, sports, literally everything a human being interacts with).

    The hardline people that blocked banner ads way back when and loudly complained allowing advertising in any capacity on the internet would ruin everything were correct. We all groaned because no one wanted to donate to cover the hosting bills (which often turned out to be grossly inflated on larger sites by greedy site operators looking to make bank off their community) but we should have listened

    The turning point for me is when banner ads added sounds. I would tolerate and ignore the flashing lights and the fake "games", but then I encountered one that any time my mouse went over top of it an emoji screamed "HELOOOOOOOOO!!!" at me and I couldn't download an ad blocker fast enough.

    It's never enough for these assholes unless they have all of your attention all of the time.

  • The toolbars came from scam software on the '90s. Ads being able to install things came well into the '00s.

    yeah, there was quite a long time where useful software was bundled with toolbars or, the worse option, malware that hijacked your browser, which was a pain in the ass to remove. I was the techie in the family, and i got pretty good with tools like hijackthis and knowing by heart what services and background programs should start on a standard win98 or xp installation. (in this time i also was THE guy to ask at my job when issues with 56k modems came up, diagnosing a lot of issues by listening to the dial-up tones)

  • Ad blockers are the fight. Those users who can't be bothered to learn a bit about the devices they spend so much time on aren't owed anything.

    What does "fighting the good fight" even look like to you in this context, anyways?

    those users who can’t be bothered to learn
    snooty tech elitism

    What does “fighting the good fight” even look like to you in this context, anyways?
    We built the entire infrastucture, we can poison it's business model.

    When the first banner ad appeared on the web, the condemnation was not loud enough and it was allowed to fester.
    At this points these entities have become large enough that the evil practice that could have been snuffed out, is now being accepted.
    Now every slimey thing on the internet is due for the mother of all crackdowns. Something like the GDPR times 911.

    I'm not in the mood for centrist technocratic measured solution at the moment.
    If it makes more than a million a year and it's using any kind of psychological tactics,
    that's advertising, sponsored search, dark patterns, then BURN IT ALL DOWN

  • “The growth of dark traffic undermines the ability of publishers to fund the production of quality content, or even operate as a business. We must recognise users are not the main driver causing this.”

    And Scott Messer, founder of publishing adtech consultancy Messer Media, added: “Dark traffic is unlike anything we have seen before. It’s demonetising publisher content at scale without user consent.

    Are they trying to present it as if poor innocent users need to be protected from the vile ad blockers?

    They always care about us when they are losing money arent they...

  • those users who can’t be bothered to learn
    snooty tech elitism

    What does “fighting the good fight” even look like to you in this context, anyways?
    We built the entire infrastucture, we can poison it's business model.

    When the first banner ad appeared on the web, the condemnation was not loud enough and it was allowed to fester.
    At this points these entities have become large enough that the evil practice that could have been snuffed out, is now being accepted.
    Now every slimey thing on the internet is due for the mother of all crackdowns. Something like the GDPR times 911.

    I'm not in the mood for centrist technocratic measured solution at the moment.
    If it makes more than a million a year and it's using any kind of psychological tactics,
    that's advertising, sponsored search, dark patterns, then BURN IT ALL DOWN

    The tech community came up with a technical solution to the ad problem. If the solution you're looking for isn't technical, why is your focus on the tech community?

    Anyone can learn this shit. Use any search engine, type "how to block internet ads", and you'll see results with "firefox" and "ublock origin", that can then be put into "how to get" follow up searches.

    The current state of ads is being accepted by those who don't block them. Everyone who does block them (or refuses to visit ad cancer sites) has cut off that source of revenue, but those who just choose to accept the default option enable them by not just seeing the ads but even sometimes clicking them and buying shit.

  • They wont be happy until eye tracking technology makes sure we sit and watch their fucking ads before the actual content appears.

    I mean, none of this is getting better. Its only going to become worse. I have ads in the fucking pause screen on my streaming tv app. So if I want to take a toilet break, I get an ad in my face. Its just so ridiculous.

    What most of these people don't get is if they didn't get so invasive with those ads, people would not have to resort to ad blockers. Be it tho shut up the ads every few seconds on YouTube or having to play whack-a-mole every time I read an article, eventually you run out of patience and say "enough!"

  • Jesus. How are you going to get to 8.8.8.8 belt licks?

    (and please, for the love of god, don't use 8.8.8.8!)

    Joke's on him, it's 100.99.99.99

  • They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.

    Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.

    I personally am not bothered at ALL by the banner video ads overlayed on top of another banner ad that opens a new tab when you try to close the banner video then another one opens covering the original banner then the page scrolls all the way back to the top and shows you an email list sign up, why would I be?

  • They call it "dark traffic" - ads that are not seen by tech-savvy users who have excellent ad blockers.

    Not surprised that its growing. The web is unusable without an ad blocker and its only getting worse, and will continue to get worse every month.

    Website: "You appear to be using an ad blocker."
    Me: "You appear to be correct."

  • Maybe we could turn it around: adblockers are tools that block ads and other kinds of dark traffic such as trackers and malicious scripts.

    As ads are specifically designed to use you for money I think even without the trackers and scripts they are manipulative and toxic. People will talk about the morality of media today, how some is violent, pornographic, or woke (to clarify; woke complaints are bullshit) but all of these play on human impulses just like ads do. The number of people I've known over my life that cope with mental illness by purchasing shit they don't need is far larger than any other vice.

  • 25 years of adblockers and that is the single most important thing that keeps me from cutting myself off the web.
    I've donated money to adblockers and will continue to do so until I die!
    I send emails to the web sites that ask me to remove the blocker to tell them I will not and that there are many other sites that welcome my adblocking ass!

    I think about doing that except with sites that suggest me turning off my VPN. -If i turned it off, then that would defeat the purpose of me having a VPN.

  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 114 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    45 Aufrufe
    S
    I admire your positivity. I do not share it though, because from what I have seen, because even if there are open weights, the one with the biggest datacenter will in the future hold the most intelligent and performance model. Very similar to how even if storage space is very cheap today, large companies are holding all the data anyway. AI will go the same way, and thus the megacorps will and in some extent already are owning not only our data, but our thoughts and the ability to modify them. I mean, sponsored prompt injection is just the first thought modifying thing, imagine Google search sponsored hits, but instead it's a hyperconvincing AI response that subtly nudges you to a certain brand or way of thinking. Absolutely terrifies me, especially with all the research Meta has done on how to manipulate people's mood and behaviour through which social media posts they are presented with
  • 10 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    29 Aufrufe
    T
    "Science" under capitalism has always been funded and developed by/for fascists. The originals in the USA were the founding enslavers. The nazis had their time. Now it's the zios. R&D for genocide as usual.
  • No JS, No CSS, No HTML: online "clubs" celebrate plainer websites

    Technology technology
    205
    2
    772 Stimmen
    205 Beiträge
    965 Aufrufe
    R
    Gemini is just a web replacement protocol. With basic things we remember from olden days Web, but with everything non-essential removed, for a client to be doable in a couple of days. I have my own Gemini viewer, LOL. This for me seems a completely different application from torrents. I was dreaming for a thing similar to torrent trackers for aggregating storage and computation and indexing and search, with search and aggregation and other services' responses being structured and standardized, and cryptographic identities, and some kind of market services to sell and buy storage and computation in unified and pooled, but transparent way (scripted by buyer\seller), similar to MMORPG markets, with the representation (what is a siloed service in modern web) being on the client native application, and those services allowing to build any kind of client-server huge system on them, that being global. But that's more of a global Facebook\Usenet\whatever, a killer of platforms. Their infrastructure is internal, while their representation is public on the Internet. I want to make infrastructure public on the Internet, and representation client-side, sharing it for many kinds of applications. Adding another layer to the OSI model, so to say, between transport and application layer. For this application: I think you could have some kind of Kademlia-based p2p with groups voluntarily joined (involving very huge groups) where nodes store replicas of partitions of group common data based on their pseudo-random identifiers and/or some kind of ring built from those identifiers, to balance storage and resilience. If a group has a creator, then you can have replication factor propagated signed by them, and membership too signed by them. But if having a creator (even with cryptographically delegated decisions) and propagating changes by them is not ok, then maybe just using whole data hash, or it's bittorrent-like info tree hash, as namespace with peers freely joining it can do. Then it may be better to partition not by parts of the whole piece, but by info tree? I guess making it exactly bittorrent-like is not a good idea, rather some kind of block tree, like for a filesystem, and a separate piece of information to lookup which file is in which blocks. If we are doing directory structure. Then, with freely joining it, there's no need in any owners or replication factors, I guess just pseudorandom distribution of hashes will do, and each node storing first partitions closest to its hash. Now thinking about it, such a system would be not that different from bittorrent and can even be interoperable with it. There's the issue of updates, yes, hence I've started with groups having hierarchy of creators, who can make or accept those updates. Having that and the ability to gradually store one group's data to another group, it should be possible to do forks of a certain state. But that line of thought makes reusing bittorrent only possible for part of the system. The whole database is guaranteed to be more than a normal HDD (1 TB? I dunno). Absolutely guaranteed, no doubt at all. 1 TB (for example) would be someone's collection of favorite stuff, and not too rich one.
  • 229 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    60 Aufrufe
    S
    The result now is that no website will load because the rest of the world will have broadband anyway
  • Using Signal groups for activism

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    204 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    184 Aufrufe
    ulrich@feddit.orgU
    You're using a messaging app that was built with the express intent of being private and encrypted. Yes. You're asking why you can't have a right to privacy when you use your real name as your display handle in order to hide your phone number. I didn't ask anything. I stated it definitively. If you then use personal details as your screen name, you can't get mad at the app for not hiding your personal details. I've already explained this. I am not mad. I am telling you why it's a bad product for activism. Chatting with your friends and clients isn't what this app is for. That's...exactly what it's for. And I don't know where you got the idea that it's not. It's absurd. Certainly Snowden never said anything of the sort. Signal themselves never said anything of the sort. There are other apps for that. Of course there are. They're varying degrees of not private, secure, or easy to use.
  • Teachers Are Not OK

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    252 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    98 Aufrufe
    curious_canid@lemmy.caC
    AI is so far from being the main problem with our current US educational system that I'm not sure why we bother to talk about it. Until we can produce students who meet minimum standards for literacy and critical thinking, AI is a sideshow.
  • U.S.-Sanctioned Terrorists Enjoy Premium Boost on X

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    90 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    38 Aufrufe
    M
    Yeah but considering who's in charge of the government, half of us will be hit with that designation sooner or later.