https://www.theatlantic.com/please- support-us/?next=https%3

Turn off adblock, sail right past it.

>>60005227
>https://www.theatlantic.com/please-support-us/?next=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatlantic.com%2Ftechnology%2Farchive%2F2017%2F04%2Fthe-tragedy-of-google-books%2F523320%2F#seen

Pihole seems to ve working

>>60005227
it worked for me without any modification to my existing setup

ublock origin, umatrix, refcontrol, decentraleyes

>reading The Atlantic

File: Screen Shot 2017-04-21 at 3.00.30 PM.png (602KB, 1086x714px) Image search: [Google]

602KB, 1086x714px

I clicked it and immediately went to this article with no ads

maybe your ad blocker is shit

works perfectly fine for me on android with adaway
i've seen only one site that can detect hosts file based adblocking kek

File: Untitled.png (879KB, 1920x1032px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 1920x1032px

>>60005227

wow it's fucking nothing

unfortunately it works with ublock origin. I hope someone smart figures out a way to really fuck with adblockers.

antiadblockers should start studying malware, packers, polymorphism and anti av techniques. not directly applicable as is but good inspiration.

Use your adblocker to remove those modals.
Or disable cookies for this domain (umatrix)
Or set your referer from Google. This works on most on news sites.

I countered OP's website by blocking inline scripts. This one can't however, any ideas?
https://blockadblock.com/

>>60005346
it's funny you'd be so obsessed with content profitability when the article is about a tragedy inflicted by copyright

>>60005227
I actually had to enable JS for that domain and then it worked. Unfortunately, this shit is nothing new.

File: IMG_0119.png (2MB, 1242x2208px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1242x2208px

>>60005227
LGTM

File: armored-knight.jpg (98KB, 333x500px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 333x500px

I'm sure there's aggregator sites out there which copy each article The Fake Ocean releases.
Use them instead OP.

>>60005346

This will kill the adblock killers...

https://reek.github.io/anti-adblock-killer/

>>60005382
I don't give a shit about content profitability. I use ublock origin because I can. I still find people who think it's their "right" to disable ads really annoying. It's not your right: you are doing something morally wrong but somehow you still want to feel good about yourself by doing it.
>>60005454
For now. Just wait until adblockers become more common and advertisers and publishers find it worth their while to do something more than an hacked together popup script run through a couple of obfuscators and minifiers.

File: images.jpg (5KB, 347x145px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 347x145px

>>60005576

Why would I wait when I can use reek now and not be inconvenienced at all?

NO annoying and no annoying ad-blocker blocks.

File: Screenshot from 2017-04-21 16-38-09.png (727KB, 1569x904px) Image search: [Google]

727KB, 1569x904px

>>60005710

Damn, was watching Tucker Carlson and crazy bitch was spun up and my sentence got fucked up.

>No annoying ads and no annoying ad-blocker blocks.

>>60005576
>I still find people who think it's their "right" to disable ads really annoying. It's not your right: you are doing something morally wrong but somehow you still want to feel good about yourself by doing it.
There's nothing wrong about blocking ads at all. It's no more wrong than watching TV and running to the restroom during a commercial break, or reading a newspaper's articles while tossing the classifieds in the bin sight unseen.

An HTTP server on the public web is the digital version of standing on a corner handing out free newspapers to anyone who comes and asks for one. Once you've handed over the newspaper, you have no legal, ethical, or practical ability to tell them how they may read it. Which includes reading your articles and not reading your ads.

If you want to give your content to people who pay for it and those people only, that's fine. You do that with a paywall.

>>60005227

punch the url into archive.is

>>60005227
Quit reading shitty news. That'll prolly fix your problem.

>>60005779
>you do that with a paywall
Which we also dodge eventually.

>>60005576
If it were possible to render real world billboards and other such posted ads invisible to myself, would that be immoral?

>>60005245
can confirm

>>60005227
what?
It just loaded for me with uBlock Origin, didn't have to change anything
No ads either

>>60005227
>are using firefox private browsing
Hahahaha.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

>>60005227
>have ublock origin installed
>go to link
>it just works