gorshill on suicide watch

Sorry, I can't view that site, because they block users who block ads.

it's the end of antiadblockers: https://github.com/reek/anti-adblock-killer

adblockers are a teeny tiny fraction in the big picture.

people make way too much noise about them and by accident may teach many to search for them on the web.

>>55494211
Try to open their site, idiot. They have full time professional programmers ready to break any anti-anti-adblocker your autististic former Atari hobbyists can think of.

>>55494220
They are a tiny fraction if you own a site targeted at American seniors. If your public is young people or the technically illiterate, your entire revenue is gone.

isn't this a troll site?
>summer
oh right

>>55494277
technically LITERATE *

>>55494285
Just try to open their site, cocksucker. Adblockers have been defeated.

>>55494277
>run several "local crime and mugshot" websites in florida retirement communities
>don't have to worry about this until my entire demographic dies off within the next ~10 years

op is selling doom and gloom. completely ignores the fact that many people will simply not use sites that require you to disable adblocking or have unreasonable advertising practices

>lol just paste obfuscated Javascript into your website, what could go wrong?
"They trust me, dumbfucks"
-James, owner of BlockAdblock

i have adblock, and can open the site
kys goy

File: Screenshot (16).png (379KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 1920x1080px

>>55494277
>>55494328
suck my dickaroo

>>55494180
> what are sciptblockers

File: Screenshot_2016-07-09-12-56-02.png (545KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

545KB, 1440x2560px

>>55494180
>>55494210
>>55494277
I can still open it with host file ad blocking and uBlock enabled.
Suck my fucking cock, kike.

File: wrong-sign.jpg (265KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 800x600px

Literally the only good thing on that site is this image.

uBlock + uMatrix + NoScript here. I can see that site perfectly. what's the problem?

This is so dumb.

To get rid of adblockers, you need to fix the root problem - adverts can be misleading, annoying as fuck, contain malware, be huge in file size, and invade your privacy.

If ad networks moderated their network, not nearly as many people would use adblockers.

>>55494681
Do you ride a horse on top of a truck inside a train when you go to work too?

File: Screenshot.png (4KB, 151x68px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 151x68px

Dropped

>>55494729
yes and sometimes i walk

all good sites work without javascript anyway so get fucked morons.

>>55494710
Speak for yourself. I will use adblockers as long as they exist.

I blacklist sites that block ad blockers .
I then find the same info elsewhere in roughly 5 or so seconds . Sometimes 10 .

File: 1-44-MB_0.jpg (106KB, 483x566px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 483x566px

http://blockadblock.com/adblocking/9-ways-adblock-is-destroying-the-web-as-we-know-it/

/g/ can't google for shit
Disable EasyList and the site works
wasn't that hard

>>55494710
shoo moralfag

From a business point of view, this is useless as this reduce your number of potential views, so that's why it'll never gain attention.

What advertiser need is a way to *bypass* adblockers, so they can still get their fraction of pennies.

File: works-fullpage.png (192KB, 1214x1792px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1214x1792px

>>55494180
>the end of adblockers
But they can't even block me, an interweb nobody.
Is this a serious website or is OP trolling?

File: Screenshot_20160709-171013.png (292KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1080x1920px

AdAway :^)

>>55495083
>What advertiser need is a way to *bypass* adblockers, so they can still get their fraction of pennies.
Maybe something radical, like a static image on their webpage created in-house. Call me crazy...

File: Untitled.png (940KB, 2370x1369px) Image search: [Google]

940KB, 2370x1369px

>>55494180
get fucked

>all these screenshot cucks at the top of the page
Try scrolling down and you'll get cucked by a pop-up

File: GIF.gif (3MB, 1643x1064px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1643x1064px

>>55497042
you what?

>>55494180
Is it supposed to be active on the site? Because I can't get any warning or similar to appear, no matter how much I try.

>>55497042
Btfo

>>55497084
You don't even have an adblock retard

>>55497320
fucking retard
>>55497005

>>55497365
That's not an ad-blocking browser extension you cuck, it doesn't count

>>55497424
>you're blocking ads but you're not blocking ads
>(You)
fucking retard

>>55494180
All "anti" adblock methods have to rely on javascript and I block that too.

>>55494793
This.

File: 1460487357124.jpg (38KB, 460x693px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 460x693px

>>55494512
>google chrome on windows 10

>whining about adblockers
people don't seem to understand that if they are making their content accessable for everyone they simply don't have a fucking right to beg for money

>>55494180
Why should I care, the anti-adblock lists will update and this script of theirs will no longer work. NoScript already breaks their scripts.

>>55494180
Like thieves, it's impossible to stop adblockers. Good news is uBlock Origen hides the ads after loading them, technically making it an ad hider.

>>55494180
Gorhill makes uMatrix which blocks this perfectly.

File: 1451537012224.png (52KB, 1550x1038px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1550x1038px

I cant actually send this out because google is asking for phone verification, but here you go anyways.

>>55497740

>I use Ghostery

why the fuck would you do that?

>>55497786
I dunno lol?

File: 2016-07-10 01_49_59-BlockAdblock _ Stop Losing Ad Revenue.png (99KB, 1521x274px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1521x274px

>>55494180
Wowwwwwwww, that was hard.

Literally circumvented with 1 click.

>>55497786

What's wrong with Ghostery?

>>55497851
enjoy being sold

>>55497817
>It's so easy to steal! :) :) :)

Do you feel good about stealing revenue by people just trying to make a fucking living? Everyone in this thread is using adblockers, what the fuck.

>>55497546
>9gag
Mcfucking kill yourself.

Is adblock piracy?

>>55498070
no

what difference does it make if I would never click on an add or buy something from an ad?

>>55497882
>Not loading things on your computer is stealing
I already thought the anti-piracy fags were stupid, but this is next-level corpcuckary.

>muting the tv during commercials is stealing
>leaving the room during commercials is stealing
>changing the channel during commercials is stealing

:^)

I don't even visit websites which depend on advertising revenue besides here, but I have a pass anyway.
Regardless, ublock origin lets me access this thingo fine.

>>55494745
>he does it for free
white-knighting for the ad industry

>>55494180
>How much revenue do you lose every month to ad blockers?

you can't count money you never made as money that you lost. That doesn't make sense

>>55496216
this desu
4chan is one of the few sites that get it right

>>55498204
If you think that's retarded, check out these mental gymnastics
http://blockadblock.com/adblocking/is-adblock-plus-violating-the-dmca/

>>55497320
I use NoScipt and Ablock Latitude for Palemoon. No popups and I can view the page.

function strip_tags (input, allowed) { // eslint-disable-line camelcase
                  //  discuss at: http://locutus.io/php/strip_tags/
                  // original by: Kevin van Zonneveld (http://kvz.io)
                  // improved by: Luke Godfrey
                  // improved by: Kevin van Zonneveld (http://kvz.io)
                  //    input by: Pul
                  //    input by: Alex
                  //    input by: Marc Palau
                  //    input by: Brett Zamir (http://brett-zamir.me)
                  //    input by: Bobby Drake
                  //    input by: Evertjan Garretsen
                  // bugfixed by: Kevin van Zonneveld (http://kvz.io)
                  // bugfixed by: Onno Marsman (https://twitter.com/onnomarsman)
                  // bugfixed by: Kevin van Zonneveld (http://kvz.io)
                  // bugfixed by: Kevin van Zonneveld (http://kvz.io)
                  // bugfixed by: Eric Nagel
                  // bugfixed by: Kevin van Zonneveld (http://kvz.io)
                  // bugfixed by: Tomasz Wesolowski
                  //  revised by: Rafał Kukawski (http://blog.kukawski.pl)

>>55494277
and the people that are coding free anti-antiadblockers actually care about what they're coding and will continue to block ads. the anti-adblockers are just normies with a job that give no shits outside their paychecks.

being paid doesn't mean the job gets done better.

This site makes me so mad

Is anti-adblock just DRM 2: Electric Boogaloo?

File: 1456201885480.jpg (30KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x450px

>>55494180
>fuckadblock
This has been around for more than a year you fucking knuclehead. And since there's already fuckfuckadblock and >>55494211

File: 1443511958670.jpg (7KB, 276x182px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 276x182px

>>55494512
>/pol/ - YLYL

>>55497817
>>55497740
>>55497084
>>55497005
>>55495767
>>55495571
>>55494576
>>55494512
They're not blocking you from the main page retards. Try clicking on 'BlockAdblock filter search'.

https://github.com/reek/anti-adblock-killer/issues/1666

The script they give you has been obfuscated/packed using a tool from Dean Edwards.
It can be mostly deobfuscated using this tool: http://dean.edwards.name/unpacker/

Here's an interesting snippet:

 var i = '0.1',
                r = f,
                e = document.createElement('DIV');
            e.id = r;
            e.style.position = 'absolute';
            e.style.left = '-5000px';
            e.style.top = '-5000px';
            e.style.height = '60px';
            e.style.width = '468px';
            var d = document.body.childNodes,
                a = Math.floor(d.length / 2);
            if (a > 15) {
                var n = document.createElement('div');
                n.style.position = 'absolute';
                n.style.height = '0px';
                n.style.width = '0px';
                n.style.top = '-5000px';
                n.style.left = '-5000px';
                document.body.insertBefore(n, document.body.childNodes[a]);
                n.appendChild(e);
                var o = document.createElement('DIV');
                o.id = 'banner_ad';
                o.style.position = 'absolute';
                o.style.left = '-5000px';
                o.style.top = '-5000px';
                document.body.appendChild(o)
            } else {
                e.id = 'banner_ad';
                document.body.appendChild(e)
            };
            l = setInterval(function() {
                if (e) {
                    t((e.clientHeight == 0), i);
                    t((e.clientWidth == 0), i);
                    t((e.display == 'hidden'), i);
                    t((e.visibility == 'none'), i);
                    t((e.opacity == 0), i)
                } else {
                    t(!0, i)
                }
            }, 1000)

A pretty obvious method - create a div with an id that many ad-blockers detect ('banner_ad') and throw a tantrum if the element is ever removed or hidden.

>>55494180
Nice thread, OP. It really made me think.

>>55500386
In addition, it looks like they pick a bunch of random domain names, image names, and div IDs from a list, and try to create a (hidden) div with the specified image.
I haven't looked carefully into how it works, but it looks like they randomly choose a few permutations of domain name, requested image name, and div name (or maybe these are img names, not divs. I didn't look closely).

Domains:
adn.ebay.com, ad.mail.ru, juicyads.com, ad.foxnetworks.com, partnerads.ysm.yahoo.com, a.livesportmedia.eu, agoda.net/banners, advertising.aol.com, cas.clickability.com, promote.pair.com, ads.yahoo.com, ads.zynga.com, adsatt.abcnews.starwave.com, adsatt.espn.starwave.com, as.inbox.com, partnerads.ysm.yahoo.com

Files:
favicon.ico, banner.jpg, 468x60.jpg, 720x90.jpg, skyscraper.jpg, 1367_ad-clientID2464.jpg, adclient-002147-host1-banner-ad.jpg, CDN-334-109-137x-ad-banner, favicon.ico, ad-large.png, square-ad.png, favicon1.ico, banner_ad.gif, large_banner.gif, wide_skyscraper.jpg, advertisement-34323.jpg

Div-names:
ad-left, adBannerWrap, ad-frame, ad-header, ad-img, ad-inner, ad-label, ad-lb, ad-footer, ad-container, ad-container-1, ad-container-2, Ad300x145, Ad300x250, Ad728x90, AdArea, AdFrame1, AdFrame2, AdFrame3, AdFrame4, AdLayer1, AdLayer2, Ads_google_01, Ads_google_02, Ads_google_03, Ads_google_04, DivAd, DivAd1, DivAd2, DivAd3, DivAdA, DivAdB, DivAdC, AdImage, AdDiv, AdBox160, AdContainer, glinkswrapper, adTeaser, banner_ad, adBanner, adbanner, adAd, bannerad,  ad_box, ad_channel, adserver, bannerid, adslot, popupad, adsense, google_ad, outbrain-paid, sponsored_link

>>55497546
That's Chromium, you uncultured twat.

>>55500572
>he thinks there is a difference
whatever helps you sleep at night I guess

File: Screenshot_2016-07-09-21-21-23.png (223KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1440x2560px

>>55500176
K

File: Capture3.png (37KB, 1546x366px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1546x366px

>>55500176
>damage control

thanks for the clicks btw

File: 1447553155978.png (108KB, 700x673px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 700x673px

>>55500632
Yeah, I saw this for a few seconds before the adblock prompt kicked in. Can't fool me idiot

>>55500639
What damage control? They blocked you.

>>55494180
That's nice. Truly, it blocks my blocker. If this picks up, the maintainers of the adblockers will just issue an update to circumvent the adbloker-blockers.

Moreover, adblockers never gained enough steam in order to elicit real response. Yeah, "technology" related outlets have reported on the issue and some faffing-about is done in tech land, but that's it.

Unless normies start blocking ads en-masse, nothing will amount of this, and even then, I doubt it.

>>55500718
>still damage controlling
Your shit site doesn't work. Eat shit, kike.

>>55498200

The page will load faster if you don't load the adds. Safe for work sites won't show you sex toys adds, potentially causing you trouble. No intrusive adds that pop up to make you read them. Those are three differences. Oh, and they don't earn $0.00004 per visitor :(

File: 1437967664341.jpg (27KB, 508x524px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 508x524px

>>55500739
Are you retarded or just shitposting?

File: Screen Shot 2016-07-09 at 11.31.02 PM.png (64KB, 691x496px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 691x496px

>>55494180
This triggers the blogger

>>55494180
We need a
blockblockadblock

>>55500753
I could say the same to you.
>frogposter
Nevermind, you're just retarded.

>>55500176
Firefox with NoScript and ABP (I don't give a shit about a checkbox I can clear) user reporting.

They ain't blockin' shit, nigga. I can see the page just fine.

>>55500767
Is this what denial looks like? Anyways, you seem real fucking salty you adblock didn't work on this site.

>>55500773
Finish reading my post chucklefuck.

>>55500739
Except it clearly worked on you.

>>55500753
Both

File: e807896d34f61fb0073e1d247005be69.gif (190KB, 800x406px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 800x406px

>>55500718
>>55500753
>>55500795
>>55500807
Here's a .gif if you're still unconvinced. Face it, your stupid script doesn't block shit.

>>55500795
>Finish reading my post chucklefuck.
I did, dipshit.

The 'BlockAdblock filter search' link on the main page works and I can see it just fine.

I'll keep on using an adblocker and neither you or a shitty website that specializes in blocking adblockers can do anything to stop me.

File: 1466545132433.jpg (64KB, 720x552px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 720x552px

>>55494180
> anno domini praesens
> having .muhFilename cruft in your urls
shiggy diggy doo

Of course, this doesn't do shit against my hosts.deny file, it can't block an adblocker if you don't have one plugged-in. I had to plug one in just to check that it works. Good job, I guess, keep us posted on how many ad-shekels come your way.

The day your faggotry exceeds supportable levels, the add-ons will move from the browser, to the OS level, just cause the normies can't be asked to fuck around with hosts files.

If your target is the technologically (i)literate millenials, you're shit outta luck. It'll take them 10 seconds to google and download a free as in antifreeze solution to circumvent the ads.

>>55494180
Hmm... Really made me think.
/g/ BTFO
How can /g/ ever recover?

File: 1467055977934.png (2MB, 1275x1041px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1275x1041px

>>55501007
>/g/ btfo

Just add these filters, it works on my computer.

@@||blockadblock.com^$generichide
@@|http://$image,domain=blockadblock.com

Source : https://forums.lanik.us/viewtopic.php?p=93294#p93294
>Unblocking these morons is a question of honor

honor, kek

>>55500887
>look at me I'm so clever I disabled scripts!
Yeah i can do that too. Does the website still work? No. That's why you're hovering your mouse instead of interacting with anything on the page to hide it. Eat shit retard.

>your stupid script
>your
It's not mine just because I'm calling you retarded.

>>55500904
See above.

>>55501270
What do you want me to interact with? Whatever it is, I'll do it, and it'll work, because your script doesn't do shit.

>>55501327
>Enter your domain to search for and track filter-list additions and changes

File: 68aee68f0e0192cd11cf66876b955edc.gif (607KB, 800x396px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 800x396px

>>55501330
Here you are. Had to be segmented.
1/4

File: b2470e8d11f5aae9f60676cf94854597.gif (384KB, 768x586px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 768x586px

>>55501330
2/4

>>55501470
>>55501478
Why are you cropping your screen? How do I know if you haven't turned adblocking off?

File: d16a4d13e3f848b35f7c5b6a9c2baf3e.gif (2MB, 714x426px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 714x426px

>>55501330
3/4

File: 446cdd110d85fd6505847d58985d9af6.gif (396KB, 688x434px) Image search: [Google]

396KB, 688x434px

>>55501330
4/4
get fucked

So the war begins.
I predicted this a while back- people would block adblockers and then people would write adblocker blocker blockers.
Ultimately though people will just stop visiting content if they can't block the ads.

>>55501512
You're a few years late.

>>55501512
This cat and mouse game has happened for years. You didn't predict shit.

>>55501512
it won't end like that

all the zaibatsu (google, facebook, twitter etc) will get together one day and decide to block everyone who uses adblocking software from accessing their sites

the change will happen overnight

>>55501486
I block ads through hosts, and if I captured my entire screen, the filesize would be too large.

>>55501538
>through hosts
>implying blocking by domain bypasses 1p scripts
And that's how I know you're full of shit. I bet you use inspect element to get of the (You)s facing samefagging accusations too.

>>55501526
So they will whitelist the few websites they care about and the ad industry still collapses.

>>55501560
No, not really. Your script just sucks. I don't know why this is so hard for you to believe, countermeasures never work.

>>55500386
Noice work there senpai

>>55501611
>I don't know why this is so hard for you to believe
Because, nigger, if you blocked it with hosts file you wouldn't be able to access the website AT ALL. That's how HOSTS BLOCKING works. I'm explaining this to you because you obviously don't use it and don't understand it. It's the worst form of adblocking available.

You sound really buttblasted. I have literally nothing against adblocking. I'm using ublock0, reek's userjs, and umatrix RIGHT NOW. I'm just stating a fact that this website works as intended and anti-anti-adblock scripts haven't caught up to it yet.


Next time think twice about lying on /g/.

>>55501652
I don't need to block whole websites to get rid of 3rd party advertisements.

>>55501716
>block whole websites
But that's exactly what you're doing if you use hosts, imbecile. What part of blocking by domain do you not understand?

>>55494180
illegal in the EU

File: nicememe.webm (2MB, 704x608px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 704x608px

>>55501652
OP, you are right, hosts are not really viable, especially if the ads are locally sourced. Ideally, all the shit is sucked from idfx.com or somesuch and you block that, but that is the ideal situation.

However, this "new and improved" method is laughably easy to circumvent.

Is this it?

Really?

>>55501745
That's not what I mean. I don't need to block a 1st party website to remove its 3rd party advertisements.

>>55498015
I started blocking ads because of obnoxious ads that would displace half the page I was trying to read, or play audio, or autostart an ad video. Like, I don't complain about the ads in free newspapers, or on buses, billboards, even TV commercials, because I can easily ignore those if I so choose. Before browsers started adding indicators showing which tab was playing audio, I had to hunt for the obnoxious ad, because the audio often wouldn't start right away.

Sorry, ad makers tanked their own ship. Don't blame me because they couldn't play nice.

Besides, advertising can still be done through curated ads. If you allow content creators, forum admits, etc to approve certain ads to be directly embedded in the content, those ads cannot be blocked. If, however, marketers choose to be lazy and continue to use the bullshit system that's currently in place, it's not my problem to solve.

Maybe the ads have even improved over the years, but I have no incentive to find out.

Just get anti adblock killer addon for tampermonkey
https://greasyfork.org/scripts/735-anti-adblock-killer-reek/code/Anti%20Adblock%20Killer%20%7C%20Reek.user.js

(tampermonkey: http://tampermonkey.net )

File: ass.jpg (470KB, 2560x1419px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 2560x1419px

>>55501771
>laughably easy to circumvent
By turning off some blocklists?

>>55501771
Also
>OP
Calling me that won't make me the OP, but if that makes you feel better do what you have to do.

I will always use an adblocker on every device/computer that I can.
Do I care if shitty clickbait "news" and top 10 lists sites die? No
In face I hope they do. The modern internet was a mistake and needs to be burned to the ground.

What? It cant even beat the native adblocking extension in lightning. Absolutely pathetic.

File: nicermeme.webm (3MB, 704x608px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 704x608px

>>55501835
>>55501846
Well, you don't need to get touchy, anon, I just supposed you were the OP. I myself am not the gif-posting anon, if that helps.

Is this enough blocklists?

>>55501936
there's something wrong with your adblock if you enabled all the lists and still get less content blocked than mine.

>>55501936
show your rules and whitelist too, and purge the caches and update the filter lists

>>55501952
>there's something wrong with your adblock if you enabled all the lists and still get less content blocked than mine.
No, that's usually how it does end up.
Because you're blocking more aggressively, you're blocking at a "deeper" level and thus don't load a bunch of shit. Same if you use uMatrix/NoScript.

For example, uBlock might block 50 out of 100 scripts. Wow, 50 things blocked!
However with uMatrix enabled it just blocks the entire domain and/or the script responsible for loading all the other scripts: 1 thing blocked.

File: blockblockadblock.jpg (33KB, 617x216px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 617x216px

BlockAdBlock on suicide watch.
Pic related trivially defeats all of its protections without interfering with normal site functionality.

File: blBjTX1.jpg (116KB, 1341x746px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1341x746px

>>55502392
The Anti-Anti-Anti-Anti-Adblock