Author Topic: For all Adblock plus users (Read 5498 times)

Dan Graves · « **on:** July 21, 2012, 06:03:28 pm »

Has anyone else been having trouble removing ads on certain sites, like Amazon, or similar big name websites ?
Not surprising.
As it turns out, Adblock coder Wladimir installed a 'whitelist' function for what he says are unobtrusive ads on certain sites a while ago.
And it seems the amount of sites and ads on this list is growing rather fast.
There is a way to turn off the whitelist, which is pretty self-explanatory once you go into the program's settings, but personally, i'm so entirely not amused by this (to put it lightly) that i've just switched to Trueblock Plus.

Read more about this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adblock_Plus#Advert_filtering_controversy_and_.22acceptable.22_ads

TB-AV · « **Reply #1 on:** July 21, 2012, 06:15:43 pm »

I've been having trouble getting into some sites unless I "temp allow" things I didn't used to have to. I hate having to go a clickfest every time I go to a site but also don;t want to blanket allow.

So how is Trueblock working? Maybe I'll try that too.

Dan Graves · « **Reply #2 on:** July 21, 2012, 06:21:49 pm »

It works fine here, it even re-used my adblock filter lists.

TB-AV · « **Reply #3 on:** July 21, 2012, 06:24:51 pm »

So what's the switcharoo procedure. what do I need to do?

Saphira · « **Reply #4 on:** July 21, 2012, 06:54:43 pm »

Does Trueblock still stop the youtube ad's in the beginning of videos?

I may switch too.

Cue Zephyr · « **Reply #5 on:** July 21, 2012, 07:02:25 pm »

Quote from: Saphira on July 21, 2012, 06:54:43 pm

Does Trueblock still stop the youtube ad's in the beginning of videos?

I may switch too.

Very important one for me too.

Thanks for the heads-up Dan, long-time user of ABP.

Dan Graves · « **Reply #6 on:** July 21, 2012, 07:03:58 pm »

Simple TB, uninstall adblock plus, don't restart the browser, install trueblock, then restart the browser.
@Saphira : it is the exact same code and filters, just with the whitelist defaulted off and kept off.
So it should handle those Youtube ads nicely.
So far i haven't seen any ads on youtube, so i'd say it works.

Cue Zephyr · « **Reply #7 on:** July 21, 2012, 07:12:27 pm »

Awesome. Thanks Dan!

misterg · « **Reply #8 on:** July 21, 2012, 11:55:34 pm »

IIRC, the last time my Addblock updated itself (months ago) it asked me if I wanted to allow limited ads (the whitelist). I declined, and it's continued to work well for me. The only site I disable it on is Justin's (but even then I get fed up & turn it back on from time to time).

Andy

Saphira · « **Reply #9 on:** July 21, 2012, 11:57:48 pm »

awesome thank you very much Dan.

Dan Graves · « **Reply #10 on:** July 22, 2012, 12:24:59 am »

Well Andy, if i had gotten a notification like that i wouldn't have been as ticked off...
But i didn't, and the whitelist was enabled without my consent.
Not cool.
On top of that, i used adblock plus because i want to get rid of all advertising.
Not get rid of all advertising, except the stuff that Wladimir deems 'non intrusive'.

Dan Graves · « **Reply #11 on:** February 02, 2015, 03:20:21 pm »

Ok, i know, awesome thread Necro Dan, Necromancy +4 and all that jazz...
But i had to share this one : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/02/google_amazon_taboola_microsoft_adplock_plus_unblock/
Selling themselves out like that...
It makes me sick.

LievenDV · « **Reply #12 on:** February 02, 2015, 04:28:14 pm »

yeah read it too; sell-out in quite a pure form.... taking cash of the one thing you try to block shhiieessjj

TheCasual · « **Reply #13 on:** February 02, 2015, 06:29:47 pm »

Cheers Dan.

I've been having problems Adblock.

Dan Graves · « **Reply #14 on:** February 04, 2015, 06:24:26 pm »

Try Adblock Edge instead, or one of the other forks.
The official client has been a POS for a while.

justinguitar · « **Reply #15 on:** February 05, 2015, 09:19:13 am »

I didn't know people can block Youtube ads. That'll explain why ad revenue and views never correlate. Kind of a shame cos the revenue from Youtube supports a lot of creators.

but I get it. Most people want everything free with no inconvenience either. That's not a dig at any of you using this stuff, might lol into it myself! It's just getting harder to make the free for end user model work and other revenue streams need exploring!

TheCasual · « **Reply #16 on:** February 05, 2015, 12:13:35 pm »

I don't mind adverts as long as they're stupidly intrusive.

It's like our local newspapers website. It has stupid pops ups, videos and other annoying adverts that make reading a 30 second article take about 5 minutes.

As long as they're not stupid intrusive all adverts on indie websites adblock is turned off.

LievenDV · « **Reply #17 on:** February 05, 2015, 12:19:29 pm »

People will always seek, like water, the path of the least resistance. Useless to frustrate yourself over that justin

I never bothered to use an adblocker but some really go nuts over youtube ads (and I can't blame them)
I'm rather bothered with the fact that I always see the *same* ads and a bit too often video's on YT begin with an ad. Overlays can be a xx--xx too. As a marketeer, I always veto'd the idea's for overlays..brr horrible.

Dan Graves · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2015, 06:26:06 pm »

Quote from: justinguitar on February 05, 2015, 09:19:13 am

I didn't know people can block Youtube ads. That'll explain why ad revenue and views never correlate. Kind of a shame cos the revenue from Youtube supports a lot of creators. but I get it. Most people want everything free with no inconvenience either. That's not a dig at any of you using this stuff, might lol into it myself! It's just getting harder to make the free for end user model work and other revenue streams need exploring!

The problem is that for the longest time, youtube was really just ad-free.
Then came adverts on the pages, which was fair enough, but those got so bad they plastered the entire page...
So people started blocking them more.
Then they started with adverts before, and sometimes after and during the videos...
And THAT pisses off so many people that eventually someone figured out a way to block it all.
If advertising didn't always start off small and then grew like some giant tumor to the point where there's more ads on a page than genuine material, half as many people would be running adblockers.
Some sites will come up with a rather annoying overlay that will tell users they can't use the site if they don't allow java/flash/if they block ads, but that is easily defeated as well by just blocking that element from loading altogether...
Which, again, just pisses off the users and makes them more determined to block the ads.
Another problem is that there's a LOT of malware-spreading ads out there, which only make people go 'ads are bad, mmmkay ?', and block the lot.

Also, for the sake of being informative, adblockers are but one way people free themselves from adverts.
Hosts file based blocking (basically nullrouting the advertising servers) is quickly becoming more popular, and one can't do anything about it, as the advertising servers simply never connect with the intended target.
Advertising sites can switch names and servers, but eventually they get listed again, and there goes their advertising revenue.

What it boils down to is this : advertising on the internet wasn't an intended feature at the start of things, and like the .com bubbles that have popped and will continue popping, it is NOT a sustainable business model.
It never was to begin with, and the sooner people start understanding that, the better.
This may seem a harsh truth, and i can already hear advertising guru's scoffing at me, telling me i'm wrong...
But i remember how, in the late 80's and early 90's, many BBS'es grew too big for their breeches, started with advertising and/or 'pay to play' and then quickly went the way of the dodo. Since then i've seen many websites fall to the same problem.

shadowscott007 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 05, 2015, 08:41:14 pm »

So, who pays for all the stuff? Not trying to be a jackass, just trying to figure how it works. So we all pay for all the stuff with our broadband access fees, which would inevitably increase in direct proportion to the lost revenues? The government takes over (omg NO) and tax us for it? Everyone just supplies all the servers, services and apps for free. YouTube and the like charges the users a usage fee? Or just withers and dies? Charges the uploaders?

YouTube has to figure out how to at least (even were they a non-profit) pay the people that do the things to keep it running, keep the juice flowing into their servers.

Yeah Scott, so we want you to commute 2 hours a day and design the electronics you currently design but we don't want to pay you. You're cool with that right?

Um, no.

Majik · « **Reply #20 on:** February 05, 2015, 08:54:32 pm »

Quote from: Dan Graves on February 05, 2015, 06:26:06 pm

What it boils down to is this : advertising on the internet wasn't an intended feature at the start of things, and like the .com bubbles that have popped and will continue popping, it is NOT a sustainable business model.

I tend to agree. And it's why companies like Google are aiming for more subscription based services and why I think companies like Twitter and Facebook will, ultimately, fail.

I've worked in the Internet business a long time and I've seen a lot of companies start up offering "free" advertising based services, from dial-up ISPs in the 1990's onwards. The only way most of these companies made money was by getting a lot of customers very quickly and then selling or IPOing the company.

The other thing is, even if you come up with a new channel, or a new way to push ads which commands a premium and actually makes profits, ultimately others will follow and undercut you, and push the prices down. This, I believe, ore than ad-blocking is the main reason the ad revenues at Youtube aren't as good as they used to be.

This was the "new economics" which drove the tech bubble in the late 90s and which caused so much havoc in the financial markets, and it still survives today. It works like this: you create a high growth, negative profit company, find people who are rich (or who have access to lot of other people's savings to invest) and stupid (there's lots on Wall Street and the City of London), sell it to them for vastly more than it's worth, and let them deal with the fallout whilst you sip cocktails on your yacht.

Cheers,

Keith

Majik · « **Reply #21 on:** February 05, 2015, 09:05:18 pm »

Quote from: shadowscott007 on February 05, 2015, 08:41:14 pm

YouTube has to figure out how to at least (even were they a non-profit) pay the people that do the things to keep it running, keep the juice flowing into their servers.

That is the big quandary, and Youtube is trying to find models that work. Part of the problem is that people are so used to things being as they were that they M&B when they change.

Google, in particular, have suffered with that (although a good part of that is because Microsoft have, in recent years, spent 10s of millions of dollars each year infiltrating large companies, Government organisations and the press; creating fake consumer groups; and creating "sponsored advocates" to post blogs and comments deriding the competition).

I know they are looking at things like subscription services and have tried things like Helpouts before (which were a nice idea, but didn't seem to get any take-up). I suspect they will continue to use advertising as a key component of their revenue stream for some time, largely because it will take time for people to get used to directly paying for things more.

Cheers,

Keith

shadowscott007 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 05, 2015, 09:06:20 pm »

So you are saying the solution is for me to give youtube 5 bucks a month for access.

Give me ads thank you very much, and offer subscription services for those who don't want them.

Shadow

Majik · « **Reply #23 on:** February 05, 2015, 09:14:05 pm »

Quote from: shadowscott007 on February 05, 2015, 09:06:20 pm

So you are saying the solution is for me to give youtube 5 bucks a month for access.

If you don't want ads then, yeah. How else does the service get paid for?

Quote

Give me ads thank you very much, and offer subscription services for those who don't want them.

Well that's where it's going. I think you will always have a choice, but it wouldn't surprise me if you start to see "exclusive content" for subscribers at some point in the future.

By the way, if you pay for Google Music All Access (which is now a viable competitor to Spotify) you get a Youtube subscription bundled in.

Cheers,

Keith

stitch101 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 05, 2015, 09:14:19 pm »

Quote from: shadowscott007 on February 05, 2015, 09:06:20 pm

So you are saying the solution is for me to give youtube 5 bucks a month for access.

Give me ads thank you very much, and offer subscription services for those who don't want them.

Shadow

I'm with you Shadow. Everyone want everything for free and ad free but the money has to come from
some where. If the ads on youtube and on Justin's home page help Justin pay the bills and make a
living so be it. I hate pay based or user pay or whatever you want to call it.