GOOGLE IS ADDING A NATIVE AD BLOCKER TO CHROME https://www.

>>Unacceptable ad types would be those recently defined by the Coalition for Better Ads
so google's are acceptable
run your ads through google's systems, or don't get your ads displayed

>>59977146
Based Google.

>>59977146
Apple has had this shit for almost 2 years. And its not biased towards Google's own ads like I'm sure Chrome's version will be

File: soon.jpg (368KB, 1280x851px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1280x851px

>>59977146
I can't wait for browsers to start competing on who can block the most ads. I hope that this runs away from Google as Firefox, Safari, and Edge start saying "We block all ads! Not just non-Google ads!" The online advertising industry is on the road to bankruptcy, and it'll take Google along with it.

>>59977172
faggot. this is just google dipping there dick even deeper in fair lady internets coochy

>>59977146
This is great. I'm not totally opposed to ads (websites have to make money somehow), but intrusive ads are a plague that needs to be treated.

>>59977170
Great way to corner the ad market and look like a saint at the same time. Clever.

>>59977190
>implying law makers won't make ad blockers / ad blocking illegal sooner or later
You can't win, goy

>>59977146
>Advertising giant gets to pick which ads are blocked
That's one hell of a conflict of interest.

>>59977146
In other words they plan on copying Brave's advertising model, forcing advertisers onto it.

i cant wait for 90% of the web to be unusable because of anti-ad blockers

File: googleadblock.gif (391KB, 500x362px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 500x362px

>>59977146
>would filter out certain online ad types deemed to provide bad experiences for users

ie. not Google ads

>>59977259
Works for Brave.

That just screams conflict of interest

>>59977170
This is pretty smart, they're destroying all other ads except theirs. They'll have a monopoly on ads

>>59977146
why would i trust an adblocker from a company that makes most of its revenue through advertising?

>>59977268
I can't wait for 90% of the web to go bankrupt. We'll return to the glorious pre-clickbait era because nobody will be able to make money off of eyeballs and pageviews anymore

>>59977326
So instead everything will be behind subscription paywalls

this is a pretty huge anticompetitive move
hopefully google doesn't think that they're immune from breakups

>>59977324

because it installs the update automatically on your macbook

>using chrome over firefox
>ever

ISHYGDDS

this is a good way to trick the goyims into thinking they have an ad blocker and so wont install ublock origin.

but this is good news regardless

>>59977146
Companies are still copying Opera?

>>59977337
That's literally a better future than clickbait.

Hobbyist sites and other stuff that gets put on the web because someone has something they want to say, those will stay. Sites that will say whatever they need to say to make money will have to convince people to actually open up their wallets. That's a much higher bar. You think anyone would pay money to read Buzzfeed? Or to use Facebook? The paywalls will mitigate the massive consolidation of the web, as for any given site a large percentage of the audience will say "Fuck it, I ain't payin' real money for that", and they'll go elsewhere.

>>59977340
i dont have a macbook

>>59977433
windows too

CERTAIN ONLINE AD TYPES
E
R
T
A
I
N

>>59977437
kek I actually am using a macbook. kind of spoopy how you called it.

File: Sun Feb 26 21:49:01 2017.png (49KB, 273x192px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 273x192px

>>59977456

>>59977146
I wouldn't use adblock if ads were text only, non-animated and not maliciously placed (ie weaved between actual content)

>>59977475
you would think that not having an ad laden site would be a selling point. look at this place for example. just a modest old school banner ad without any jew gayshit.

>>59977146
in other words i still use uBlock Origin with custom filters and rules. nothing changes

>>59977320
This sounds like it will get them sued by ad companies. Looks like a win-win situation to me.

>>59977499
Does it actually make any money though. I know j-list paid some kind of set amount of money based on how much traffic came from here and actually spent money there, so it wasn't enough that people just see the banner

>>59977382
Fuck no. I'd want to reference multiple sources for accurate information. Imagine paying 10 sites just for "fact-checking." Even behind paywalls (WSJ, NYT, etc) there is still a ton of bias and misinformation.

And if everything is paywalled, you can bet they'll find a way to block the webarchive bypass.

>>59977194
delet this

>>59977146
Smart move, the moment everyone stops using third party blockers they wont be able to block google ads.

>it block everything except stuff form alphabet

>>59977262
>>59977301
>muh brave

Brave still blocks all ads by default
I don't know if they've even implemented ad replacement

4chan has been getting some malicious ads, fucking gook Hiro.

>>59977223
Google ads might not contain malware

File: tumblr_lo1qh68nVL1qzgmxb.gif (123KB, 500x387px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 500x387px

>>59977456

>>59977774
10/10
made me kek enough to reply

>>59977146
so they are going brave huh?

just enable extensions on mobile so we can uBlock Origin, Google.

File: Creepy.gif (2MB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x400px

>he doesn't use a pihole

Enjoy your laggy browser-based ad blocking

>>59977170
yeahs thats a pretty smart move 2 be honest
god i hate google

>>59977146
Lel

And edge still sits with no webm support

>>59977146
I'm ok with this. As long as they stick to blocking only intrusive ads, I see no issue with it. I normally don't mind seeing ads, as long as they don't try to fucking hi-jack my browser.

I do see the potential to abuse this, but I hope the fear of a law suit would at least keep them from overstepping their bounds.

>>59977170
Holy shit the EU is going to have a field day with lawsuits

File: B9CWDRNCcAAyg5l.jpg_large.jpg (70KB, 692x577px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 692x577px

Ad companies btfo

>>59977146
>Coalition for Better Ads
https://www.betterads.org/members/

If your ads are from one of those companies, or associated with one of those organizations, then your probably fine. This doesn't really seem like a move to stomp out competition, but it does seem like it'll make newcomers to the industry REALLY nervous.

File: 1492586467726.jpg (67KB, 633x640px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 633x640px

>>59977146
>corner a market that is built upon being fucking annoying
God damnit, Google.

>>59977146

>>59977170
>>59977184
>>59977190
>>59977194
>>59977210
>Create fastest browser to appease fb normalfags,

>See every browser slowly dying and cloning your code
>Have a virtual Monopoly on browser space,proceed to make you other service more profitable like ads.

>Next thing you know they slow Down all non Google products,like office 360,or I next annoying ads to compete for products.

>>59980400
>and then Congress goes full Bell on their asses and all the little Googles live happily ever after

Google's ads are great tho, few an unintrusive, marketer scumbags btfo

>>59980326
EU is even more corporate cucked than the US nowadays, they will probably do laws to ban anyone who isn't part of the Coalition for Better Ads

You know this thing isn't going to block trackers who follow you from site to site.

>it blocks all the ads
>except google's own ads

Incoming lawsuit

Good.
Fuck most of the ad industry.

I actually don't mind ads.
The ads I do mind are fucking pop-ups, plugin-ads, video and audio on non-av sites. (sound especially!)
Equally abusive GIF ads with high framerates. (anything over 5fps), or flashy GIFs.
And obviously, site hijackers and any malware advertisers.

Only other ads I block besides that is Youtubes video ads because fuck that shit.
I watch videos with a group of people most times. I'm not waiting 4 seconds. I'll fucking kick you in the 4 seconds.
Even my 3 year old niece skips the ads.

Don't worry, they only block disruptive ads. Ads that make sound. And ads that cover all the content.

So, when is Google going to block the unskippable YouTube ads?

>>59982086
nothing google does is good anon

My guess is, that where other blockers by default can easily block all google ads, Chrome blocker would not block Google Ads because it would classify them as acceptable. And Google would then hope that people would use their built in blocker rather than downloading a third party extension which would highly likely block there ads. And if people have a built in blocker that blocks the mostly bad ads, the people would start to hate ads less and be okay with 'good ads'. Also since people wouldn't use third party blockers as much those companies would go out business more likely.
It's a very risky move on Google's part, so would be a bit surprised if it happens. But doing nothing, is equally if not more risky in the long run for there business model.

It's Embrace, extend, and exterminate.

>>59982136
YouTube also has an unnatural backlink profile. They allow guest users to post content for SEO purposes without moderation.

I think YouTube will soon be delisted from the search engine.

>>59982136

what about malwarertising?

I wouldn't use adblocker if websites like WSJ hosted the ads themselves in .png or .jpg format

>>59982754
https://www.betterads.org/standards/

There is no mention of it.

File: 1432595252293.jpg (149KB, 590x639px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 590x639px

>>59977146
>((((((((((((((Unacceptable ad types would be those recently defined by the Coalition for Better Ads)))))))))))))))))))

>>59977146
So basically Brave. Nah I'm good at Brave only at mobile. Desktop? It's slow as heck and download tab is useless

It is a genius move, actually. By blocking the annoying ads that cause people to install add blockers in the first place, they increase the chances of people not installing a blocker that blocks everything.

I think Google will apply the rules equally and fairly. I just think that everyone else will get butt hurt about not being able to running annoying ads.

And the next step of course will be to ban all third party ad-blockers from Chrome.

>>59977146
It will display only google ads.

>>59982999
Sounds good to me, if that;'s how it is going to happen. I will still still be using a proper adblocker since every ad is intrusive to me.

>>59983051
Reminds me of SJW's who get triggered by everything.

>>59983086
You should think more carefully before you write something this stupid next time.

>>59983102
You too.

>>59983119
Y-you too...

>>59977146
With a pretty nifty whitelist for them
HAHAHHAHAHA

>>59977146
I think part of this is to try and curb blocking of their own ads.

Think about it, if they provide the feature in browser some people will remove adblocker addons instead because why have two things doing the same thing?

More of Google's ads will get through while a lot of other (and frankly worse) networks get fucked.

>>59983228
>some people will remove adblocker addons
You mean google will remove all other ablockers for those people, just like google has removed adnauseum already.

>let's block all ads that aren't ours

>>59983353
The decision that led to birth of Google Chrome.

>video with auto playing sound and prestitial ads are unacceptable to consumers

Huh? Isn't that exactly what television ads that we've had the last 60 years are?

>>59983373
TV ads are unacceptable, although the comparison here isn't fair: TV ads interrupt whatever you are watching, while online ads run in parallel, constantly distracting you from what you are consuming.

>>59983373
And YouTube.

>>59980770
This 100%

>>59977250
Surely the authorities will spend billions of dollars to bust millions of people who don't wanna be ad bombed while watching porn.

>>59983373
The internet is not TV, and most people use to tv commercials to stock up on snacks or to use the restrooms.

>>59983398
True. I have no idea how normie just put up with ads on TV, internet, and Spotify. They're fucking insane for just sitting there and taking it up the ass when it would be next to zero effort to avoid all of them

>>59983428
You can also use the 15 minute full screen online ads to stock up food and go to the restroom.

>>59983420
>Surely the authorities will spend billions of dollars to bust people for smoking weed or drinking unpasteurized milk or collecting rain water

>>59977326
>terribly made pornsites and "top ten" shit finally get killed
Nothing of value was lost.The only site I visit that has ads is 4 chang,but I block that shit anyway.

I get a sick thrill from using AdNaseum because I know google hates it

>>59983446
>drinking unpasteurized milk or collecting rain water
Do what?

lol anti trust suit incoming

the largest online ad company is going to filter ads they consider "bad" but leave their own

>>59982205
Of the fucking ad industry? Do you know what Google does?

>acceptable ads
lol

File: why.jpg (107KB, 492x479px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 492x479px

>>59977146

>Block networks that have more than X malware complaints a year
>Poach authors of popular ad-blockers
>Manufacture controversy about extremists using online ads to recruit
>Block networks that have more than X 'offensive' complaints a year
>Remove APIs that permit ad-blocking for performance reasons
>Manufacture controversy about advertising networks sponsoring terrorism and pedophillia
>Block networks with ads on 'illegal' sites (incl. piracy)
>Fold to media pressure, adopt a 'block first check second' approach ala YouTube
>Collude to 'compete' over ad-blocking performance
>Add enabled-by-default option to block 'sponsored content' (incl. self-hosted ads)
>Manufacture controversy about competitors being run by sexists
>Wait for tumblr to flood inbox with fake complaints
>Block competitor networks ('accidentally'), merge the big ones into Alphabet when their stock plummets
>All ads must now go through Google and Co's network
>Moot makes one last call to Larry
>4chan ads blocked
>Hiro commits sudoku
>4chan finally dead
>2020 anime season starts

>>59979036
>>59977320
>smart
>setting themselves up for a lawsuit

kill you are selves

>>59983513
The ad blockers, google's shit become defacto standard, and the necessary apis for ublock origin to function will be deprecated. They will say: no worries, we already have an adblocker in Chrome.

>>59983546
They have like a gorillion dollars, they'll just throw enough lawyers at them to win or settle out of court

>>59983553
I see. Seems likely.

>>59983443
And then come back to ads cluttering up your shit, making the webpage slow and eating bandwidth in the background.

>>59983443
What's to stop people from just blocking adds in their host file even if they are removed from browsers?

File: 1485189522931.jpg (49KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 640x640px

>>59977146
>Alternative title: Google wants to kill concurrency

>>59977382
>>59977631
It could be something in the middle. Taking the example of a newspaper publication, posts like news, reviews, or recommendations should still be open to everyone. But maybe they could start demanding small subscriptions or paywalls for things like graphics, documentaries, and basically any analytical piece that takes a lot of time and resources. They could make tons of profit even with small donations like 50cents or $1.

>>59983672
Run everything in a single thread? Impossible!

File: mrbeans.jpg (29KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x360px

>be advertiser
>boycot youtube by pulling ads
>rub your hands together maliciously
>get blocked by google unless you advertise with google

>>59977967
uBlock Origin has been working on Firefox mobile for a long long time.

>>59982944
>Scan error: "Unbalanced parentheses"
kys desu

It's genius and I don't know why they didn't do it earlier.
Google is an ad delivery company and they have captured the browser market with chrome. So what should you do? Block competitor's ads.

>>59980770
> EU is even more corporate cucked than the US nowadays
BS. You can't beat the USA in this regard, you just are immensely optimistic.

Your corporations even manage to elect and then support the people in charge of politics, that and other things are not yet half as much the case in Europe.

It's a very good thing for you that corporations and their owners also haven't all got the same interests and allied with each other in every sector. Let's hope it remains that way.

This is an effort for more granular ad delivery.
>>59977172
This is dumb. It's a means to deliver you more ads. Not less. Sites can perhaps start blocking adblock users completely and claim you don't need it because chrome has this fancy adblock feature you can use to block 'illegitimate ads'.

Now I don't browse crappy ad ridden sites so it doesn't affect me but I bet all of you follow the Gawker media conglomerate very closely. You should not be happy about that.

File: 1*oyJuuhaXxwL96KEks0NaVQ.png (72KB, 800x458px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 800x458px

>>59977967
they are trying to gain market share back from Samsung.
Samsung Internet already is Chromium with native content blocking.

>>59977170
Based Google. The only reason I use ad blockers are annoying ads. Google ads don't bother me.

>>59983546
The people creating monopolies and erase competition unfairly otherwise mostly get away with it in the USA.

You can even take hundreds of billions in subsidies or contracts, not meet obligations, and often get away with it (internetz for everyone! muh weapons contracts! and so on)

It'll probably pay for Google to do this, won't it...

>>59983553
This. It's only a matter of time before ublock origin gets the chopping block.

>>59984001
The whole reason ad blockers became a thing in the first place is annoying and intrusive ads. If this makes them go away forever then I am fine with that.

File: Screen Shot 2017-04-20 at 8.43.10 AM.png (576KB, 1437x853px) Image search: [Google]

576KB, 1437x853px

is there some way to make a page load as if it were in safari reader view?

reader view is great for reading shitty click bait articles. would be even better if there was a way to just load content without all the gay ads.

>>59977146
How hard is to use the Easy list?
WOW such a huge step forward.

>>59977296
>ie. not Google ads
Ohhh I see now.
Why is google always evil?

>>59977146
>filter out all ads by competitors
>still display google ads
>1 step closer to monopoly
How the hell is this legal

>>59984269
Customers don't need to use the Chrome browser.
As long as ad blocking is legal this is legal.

>>59984269
Because they are blocking based on a clearly defined set of standards rather than who is pushing them, and this benefits everyone, including other ad agencies.

>>59984269
its their own browser and its not like you cant just use another browser.

>>59980770
That is total ass.

Just look at our net situation compared to the US.

>>59977146
>blocks everything except their ads
Fucking genius

>>59977146
wtf I love ads now

>>59984279
>>59984310
>>59984314
Isn't there something among the lines of "If you're big and #1, you shouldn't abuse it"?

>>59977717
>yfw google blocks 4chan

>>59984417
wtf I love google now

>>59984160
Yeah there are plenty of extensions that provide that on chrome/ff. I think edge has it native.

>>59984516
but does it prevent the bullshit from loading in the first place or is it just some sort of overlay?

>>59977146
Fuck no, they will abuse it

>>59984411
They aren't. They are using their position to set standards to save their ass and the asses of other ad companies. It also helps websites and the average web user.

>>59984160
Firefox does this.

>>59977146
My guess is they'll soon ban all adblockers for chrome like they did for the apps of Android.
This way they have complete control of any ads visited with their products.

>>59983481
These are illegal in most states in America

>>59984855
Rain water no. That's only illegal in desert states/counties.

As for unpasteurized milk I think the problem is if you sell it. You can drink it but if you get sick that's on you.

>>59977170
3 flies one swat
>look like you are doing a great thing
>corner the market for ads by having your own large market share browser block everyone else's ads
>get more people to use your botnet data mining browsers
ofc firefox + ublock origin + noscript will still be the only real option, but it'll have normies swarming to them

>>59980770
seeing how much they hate google it will be the lawsuit of a lifetime

They literally fined google for preferring youtube links in their search results. Like fucking kidding? Are you gonna sue supermarkets too for promoting their own home generic brand?

I'm just waiting for the day the adblock function gets augmented with a feature that replaces the "evil" ads with "acceptable" ones.

I'm glad. I got an ellipsis 8 tablet for free yesterday and almost got malware but Chrome blocked it. I ran both malware bytes anti Mal and kapernsky antivirus scans and they both say I'm clean. I believe it was a malicious ad but definitely different experience with Android compared to iOS.

>>59977146
>Filter out non Google ads
>Keep Google ads
>???
>Profit

Considering Firefox is open source, why hasn't adblocking been added in yet?

>>59985135
You have some very serious misconceptions about what open source is.

>>59985135
Mozilla did actually add some blocking support they just haven't gone all the way yet. It only supports two predefined lists that block tracking scripts

>>59985135
good question, maybe it's more profitable for mozilla to not add it? the source is open but that doesn't mean anyone can edit it (unless you fork it, but then it's not FF anymore).

Mozilla is probably making bank by just not adding it

>>59985160
From what I've seen, anyone can contribute to firefox

>>59985188
You've seen wrong. Anyone's contribution can be accepted if people in charge decide to accept it. Anyone's contribution can be refused also.

>>59985203
Considering a lot of people use adblockers it must be a desired feature. If it was implemented correctly why wouldn't they add it.

>>59985266
I'm not going to answer your question, I'm just going to remark one more time that your original "Considering Firefox is open source" is completely out of place.

>>59985280
Being open source gives a larger chance of a competent developer adding it in.

>>59983125
Kek

What the fuck is AdNauseum?

Also, you guys should check out pihole.

>>59984933
B-b-b-but muh liberty! Muh freedom!

as if ads were a sustainable revenue stream for site owners since the invention of a router

>>59985314
>anon forks firefox and adds a perfect adblocker
>Mozilla: thanks anon we are considering this
>Adcorp Inc.: hello mozilla here is $1,000,000 btw you aren't planning on implementing an adblocker are you?

>>59986167
Money given to Mozilla comes with no strings attached I think the money is considered a donation. Adcorp wouldn't even bother.

>>59986225
yeah just like google "donating" to be the default search engine, nigga pls stop being naive

>>59986225
yeah sure no strings attached
these companies aren't bribing, they just donate millions

top kek

>>59986254
That goes to the Mozilla Corp which was set up specifically for those deals. That money is sent to Mozilla Foundation who decides how to part it up and spend it. Mozilla Foundation owns everything in Mozilla Corp and Mozilla Corp has no say on development.

>>59986225
Companies pay Mozilla to be the default search engine in different countries.

>>59986302
>he thinks cause the money goes to another front company (which is owned by the foundation anyways which ultimately receives the money) they don't do what they're bribed for
do you eve realize how dumb you sound? they even removed youtube playback on android by default while browsing other tabs or minimizing the app window cause jewtube red has that feature, you can't be that naive

>>59986302
nigga don't be retarded. A company pays, mozilla delivers. Nobody is just donating millions to them for the good cause of open source yet surprisingly adblock-free web browsing.

>>59986364
>they even removed youtube playback on android by default while browsing other tabs or minimizing the app window cause jewtube red has that feature,
Not sure that's true. Maybe it's true that it's broken but it sounds like you're reading too far into this.

>>59986448
>maybe it's true that it's broken
people have been whining about it for a week, go try it out on FF53 if you don't believe it, it worked on FF52 a week ago

>>59986497
Well FF53 was only released yesterday so it's probably not related to that.


https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1353273

Looks like the current theory at Mozilla is that Google is testing something that directly messes with the playback buttons. They did this before to bypass blocks on autoplaying videos. Then Mozilla improved the block by preventing websites from directly messing with the buttons when they're not specifically clicked.

>>59986622
53 wasn't released yesterday, that's just stable
you couldn't do it weeks ago on beta while you could on 52

File: Capture.png (41KB, 661x364px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 661x364px

>>59986655
It was specifically reported on Firefox 52 apparently.

>>59986687
it worked on 52.0.1 yesterday, it autoupdated to 53 a few mins later and it wouldn't work anymore, i've got no need to lie to you man
apparently they broke it on 52.0.2 which not many people updated to until 53 reached stable
https://warosu.org/g/thread/S59720710

>>59977146
rip 4chins

>>59977146
>Add native "adblocker"
>Prevent any 3rd party adblockers being installed
>Offer advertisers "premium" subscriptions that make their ads unblockable

Calling it now.

honestly if all ads were blocked I'd pay a few $ a month to access 4chins

Trust us Goyims, We are on your side!

>>59977146
>coalition for better ads
I'd love me a coalition for no ads please thank you

>>59986944
But what will become of those poor ad companies?

>ad company filters ads
no thanks, ill stick to my host file.

File: 1342559957568.jpg (17KB, 285x250px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 285x250px

>>59986978
Let them burn in hell

File: jew cloud.jpg (284KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 2048x1536px

Google is one of the biggest distributors of annoying malware ads. Are they going to block their own shit? No.

Chrome is for peasants.

So what is the /g/ certified ad blocker?
I see origin is gaining popularity but maybe i don't use it correctly cause some porn sites are flooding me.

>>59987128
Hosts file.

>>59987110
I just wish Epiphany wasn't a buggy piece of crap half the time. Still better than Jewgle though.

File: 1487778075211.png (291KB, 691x576px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 691x576px

>>59980368

a lot of websites could probably boycott chrome.
quite simple actually, if facebook decided to not
work on chrome, nobody would use it in a week

>>59984040
Do you want to watch ads before videos?

File: jew-29.jpg (22KB, 296x314px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 296x314px

>>59982784
>https://www.betterads.org/standards/
Interestingly, all "bad ad" categories for desktop browsers are also included in the mobile "bad ad" categories, but the latter also includes
>ad density higher than 30%
>flashing animated ads
>postitial ads
>full-screen scrollover ads

At least the first two of those are very common on desktop sites as well, which leaves one wondering why they don't consider them a problem on desktops.

Is it just because Google wants to improve mobile web browsing more to push more people onto mobile where they can control everything else they do too?

File: IZSc0iq.jpg (13KB, 472x299px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 472x299px

>>59977146
Jewgle at it again

>>59977316
Google ads does of course not provide a bad experience :^)

>>59977608
>>59983546

Why do idiots insist on acting as if they're legal experts?

i'm tired of these modern browsers, bring back my netscape navigator

>>59983641
Nothing. I've been blocking ads through the hosts file for over a decade. It just works, no add-ons to mess with and it works system-wide.

>>59987634
I would assume it's because they're harder things to deal with when your only method of input is a touchscreen.