News - Adblock Plus gets shins kicked by Google "security measures"

[kingpotnoodle]

Pretty much exactly my view, except that I won't use Chrome in the first place. Google grab more data about me than I like anyway, and I'm damned if I'm providing them with a gold-plated opportunity to vampire up even more.

So, this doesn't affect me. But if it did, it would stop me using Chrome. I value the ability to block ad's far more than I value the ability to use a specific browser.

Ah there we differ, I really couldn't give two hoots about Google collecting data on my internet habits. I'm very insignificant and not a criminal so nobody is going to call up my file and start looking at it, I'll just be another drop in the data pond getting averaged out and used in stats. We're watched and analysed as part of the mass wherever we are, the internet is just another place, it's no different to Tesco stalking my eating habits through my clubcard... and that gets me more relevant vouchers. I actually *like* the idea of targeted ads - if I must see them then at least they could be relevant to my interests, it might actually help me out and since I don't have a shopping addiction that'll be fine!

I don't even block ads because of the bandwidth, I'd be happy to download the ads and just have my browser hide them - it's purely because I find the flashing movement and gaudy colours annoying. I guess there is a small battery use benefit on mobile devices by blocking the ads, but probably not that much.

[devBunny]

I wouldnt even use an ad blocker if it wasnt for the ads with sound. Nothing is more annoying than having to go through dozens of tabs just to find where the pause button is on one advert

Hear, hear! :O)

[Chadders87]

Balls to google, they are becoming a money driven company focused soley on increasing share the price. Where's the "Free Web" they promised all them years ago?? I hate it when greed destroys something good.

Time to reinstall FireFox and find an alternative search engine.

[kingpotnoodle]

Balls to google, they are becoming a money driven company focused soley on increasing share the price. Where's the "Free Web" they promised all them years ago?? I hate it when greed destroys something good.

Time to reinstall FireFox and find an alternative search engine.

What publicly listed company isn't money-driven? They're pretty much required to be.

Google is not a charity or government run public service, Chrome isn't a FOSS project coded by volunteers - Google's entire empire is coded by highly paid people and run in expensive data centres, how do you suppose all that gets paid for on a "free web"?

If you don't pay for a service in direct monetary transactions then you have to pay with something that is worth money - for Google that is information and allowing yourself to be exposed to advertising.

It amazes me how many people seem to think everything should be completely free to them.

[Chadders87]

It amazes me how many people seem to think everything should be completely free to them.

I don't expect everything to be free, but I DO expect companies to try to meet the end user half way. How can these companies justify making millions in profit by lowering the end user experience. A better option would be to make money while IMPROVING things for the end user or giving the end user different options.

If they made google a premium service with no ads, I'd happily pay for it (With in reason...). But to force stuff onto me AND removing any option to opt-out (by apps or add-ons if need be), then that's greed at the cost of user satisfaction.

It amazes me that people still expect to be abused by multi-national companies simply because they are free.

Edit:

Google is a noted supporter of network neutrality. According to Google's Guide to Net Neutrality:

Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in control of what content they view and what applications they use on the Internet.

Does this also make Google hypocrites?

[Onkston]

I'm still using Firefox, never fancied chrome. I actually forget that there are ads on the Internet because I use Adblock. I would also be less inclined to use it if some of the ads were less in my face, as people have said, the ones with sound and pop-ups. Tbh though I don't really get ads and don't actually believe they even work, they obviously do, I just don't believe it. Out of everyone I've ever asked I have never found anyone who bought something because of an advert. But that's another matter

[ByteMyAscii]

They should instead of trying to screw around with the blockers, instead look at why we block ads in the first place.
Way too many ads are intrusive, resource hungry, annoying and generally getting in the way of the content they are supposed to be funding.
Get rid of the ads which take longer to stream a video that takes longer to load than the rest of the page content, the ads which pop over the content you are trying to view, etc and we will then have less reason to block them in the first place.
An ad should be an advertisement, telling me exactly what I want to know at a quick glance rather than a full blown multimedia presentation.

[JimmyBoy]

I just wanted to meet local singles in my area, is that too much to ask?

[abaxas]

Chrome is, by default, spyware. I never understand why people willingly put in on their computers.

[Saracen]

Ah there we differ, I really couldn't give two hoots about Google collecting data on my internet habits. I'm very insignificant and not a criminal so nobody is going to call up my file and start looking at it, I'll just be another drop in the data pond getting averaged out and used in stats. We're watched and analysed as part of the mass wherever we are, the internet is just another place, it's no different to Tesco stalking my eating habits through my clubcard... and that gets me more relevant vouchers. I actually *like* the idea of targeted ads - if I must see them then at least they could be relevant to my interests, it might actually help me out and since I don't have a shopping addiction that'll be fine!

I don't even block ads because of the bandwidth, I'd be happy to download the ads and just have my browser hide them - it's purely because I find the flashing movement and gaudy colours annoying. I guess there is a small battery use benefit on mobile devices by blocking the ads, but probably not that much.

Oh, we differ on it alright.

One example .... I won't use a store reward card, like Clubcard. Why? Data warehousing, data mining, and what can be, and increasingly is being, done with that data. Never mind that I'd get a few quid in vouchers every few months, if I just let them track my spending habits. Tesco can keep their vouchers and I'll keep some aspects of my privacy. In fact, I won't use Tesco at all, but that's another issue entirely. I do use Morrisons, sometimes ASDA, occasionally Aldi/LIDL, though the vast bulk of the time I use Waitrose. But I do not have and will not accept, a "reward" card from any of them. And I pay cash.

As for not being a criminal, nor am I, and I'm every bit as significant or insignificant as everyone else. I don't believe for a nano-second that anyone is going to "call up my file and start looking at it". That's not how data mining works.

But if you think, for that same single nano-second, that this data warehousing and data mining isn't going on, then I'd call that naive. Whether you care or not is entirely a personal choice. If you don't, fair eough, it's your life, your choice.

But I do care.

I do not want unsolicited marketing, from anybody, about anything, in any form or medium, under any circumstances. Period.

But I'm fully aware I'm not going to get that, just because I want it. Some marketing is unavoidable, and examples would be ad's on TV and in magazines. I do at least have the choice of whether to watch that TV channel and/or prog, and whether to buy that magazine and just skip the ad's.

But personalised marketing, directed specifically at me, I resent very deeply. It's bad enough when you get targeted ad's on the net, but that same data warehousing and data mining is also used, and increasing so, to target direct mailshots at your home, and even telephone marketing campaigns. And that form of marketing I find grossly and gratuitously offensive, precisely because some companies do it, regardless of the individusl's wishes. You can fill in all the opt-out boxes, you can subscribe to TPS, etc, and you still, to some extent, get pestered.

One way to cut that down, though it won't stop it entirely, is to minimise the data you allow to be fed into that data warehousing machine.

And think of it this way - it's the story of getting the genie back into the bottle. Once you've allowed data to be added to your profile, it's added. It's a bit like an embarrassing. photo you uploaded to the web during a drunken bout in your student days .... once it's out there, it's out there, and might be shown to a potential employer doing research on job applicants.

Once data is warehoused, you have zero control over how it's used, who uses it, and for what purpose. Just because company A got the data doesn't mean it won't end up being used by companies B through to Z, or A00002 to Z99999. It could affect everything from what junkmail you get, to your insurance premiums, to your employment prospects, to your credit rating, and so on. Some of that happens now, though much (as far as I know) doesn't. But some does. Believe me or not, it does. I'm not guessing about that.

So it's not about someone calling up your file, though it may come to that. Currently, it's mainly about company F hiring company A, giving them a profile of victims for a marketing campaign, and company A's computers churning out a targeted list.

Targeted how? Well, perhaps by products you've bought (as per your Clubcard data), perhaps by interests you've shown, (as indicated by patterns of web searches done). Maybe it also targets your age, gender, whether you have kids and if so, their age and gender, what car you drive, what TV you watch, what food types you buy, whether you smoke, how much alcohol you buy, whether your diet is healthy or you're a fast food junkie or only eat supermarket processed horse burgers, or .... the possibilities are legion.

And that's the whole point.

The machine works by having vast amounts of data, in as much mindless depth as possible, about everyone it can get hold of. Then, they type in the search criteria, pull the handle and ker-ching, you end up on someone's target list. Targeted for what? Who knows? An internet ad? Not really a problem. A junkmail letter through your door? Hardly earth-shattering. A persistent telephone marketing drive? Damned irritating. A salesman that "happened" to be in your area? Starting to get annoying. A poor candidate for health insurance or a higher risk factor for health, home or car insurance, and so higher premiums? Whoa.

Remember that genie? Once it's out of it's bottle, you'll never get it back in, and never mind that it seemed like a harmless, friendly genie when it offered you a small amount of money if you'd only, pretty please, let it out for a few minutes. And never mind that once out, it turned out to be nasty, vindictive, and incredibly hard or impossible to kill .... it's out, and that's that.

Maybe your genie will be benevolent. But maybe not. Either way, good luck getting it back in the bottle.

[Saracen]

What publicly listed company isn't money-driven? They're pretty much required to be.

Google is not a charity or government run public service, Chrome isn't a FOSS project coded by volunteers - Google's entire empire is coded by highly paid people and run in expensive data centres, how do you suppose all that gets paid for on a "free web"?

If you don't pay for a service in direct monetary transactions then you have to pay with something that is worth money - for Google that is information and allowing yourself to be exposed to advertising.

It amazes me how many people seem to think everything should be completely free to them.

Personally, I don't expect everything to be free. I won't use Chrome, free or not. But if people do use it, the "price" they're going to pay, whether it's to buy a product or get data-mined, ought to be clear, open and above board.

Given a choice of a browser that's free but ad-blocker-blocked, or paid-for but permitting ad-blocking, I'll pay and block ad's, just like I refuse to use store "reward" cards just because you get a tiny discount in a few months. And again personally, given that Chrome is Google, I'll use something else, whether it's free, like Firefox, or even if I have to pay for it. But Chrome? No chance.