News that Google intends to install an ad-blocker in its Chrome

Nope, they wont block their YT ads. They'll probably just put a small PiP window inside the video itself, which can be clickable to go full screen".

>>60723476
So like Brave? Replace it with their own ads?

File: goychan.jpg (19KB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 220x220px

>>60723528

>>60723528
How you dare to mess with brave? You Lilliputian cunt

File: kitty.gif (1MB, 202x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 202x360px

>>60723476
Google is an advertisement company. The want to embrace, extend, extinguish ad blocking before it hits their bottom line. Spoiler: it won't work.

>>60723537
>>60723542
I have nothing against Brave. Heck, I use it on my mobile phone.

>>60723476
Imagine the amount of lawsuits.

>"prestitial" count-down ads that delay the display of content
Does this include all the "you need to disable your adblocker" messages? They're basically delaying the display of content indefinitely

>>60724126
but they have no countdown.

>>60723476
Does that means google wants to make the internet great again by forcing advertisers to use simple png/jpeg ad images? Fuck yeah I'm so fucking of all those gif, autoplay, covers the whole page, *blocks your path* ads.

>>60723559
this has nothing to do with money, its about power. Taking away control from the user. Ads are just a means of doing that. Which is why Windows 10 is free. It has ads. Also data mining which requires ads as a pretext.

>>60723476
Google's just killing off competition.

Only allowed ads on Chrome will be Google's own ads in a year or so.

I hope they get sued for anti-competitive practices and the abuse of monopoly.

>>60723476
Yes, we will.

>>60723476
Ever go on a website on a factory cellphone and it redirects you to a grey site with flashing red telling you your device is broken and you need to run a scan to fix it, and no matter how hard you try to return to last page its stuck on that page and wont let you? well those are the ads they are targeting, the ones that put users at risk and bring them 0$ monetary compensation.

Why is this a bad thing?

Dangerous ads should be treated like malware. They are malware, in fact.

>>60723476
I like the sound of a morally ok AdBlocker. I do feel like an ass a bit, relentlessly blanket blocking all adverts, not even bothering to white list sites I enjoy. Would be nice knowing google blocks the intrusive ads, such as ones that redirect you, or take up half the screen, or autoplay sound, or have a looping message box.

>>60725320
it IS your moral duty to say fuck off to advertisers. They are evil

Why would I not block all ads, if I'm never going to click ads anyway?
I am never going to be their potential costumer, no matter how much they advertise. The profit they get off me is $0. I might as well just block the ads, since viewing them anyway is a waste of time and attention.

>>60725609
actually, they should be paying uu for saving bandwidth

>>60725609
I always said this argument. One thing though I was never sure about is if the company still gets ad revenue if the advert simply loads on the screen. For example the video ads that play before the youtube video starts.

ABP fired the first shots (by not blocking "ethical" ads, meaning ads which pay protection money to ABP). Google just hopped on the protection racket, and will crush any competition trying to do the same.

Fun times.