InformAction Forums

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/04 ... b-browser/

Umm. Is this really a good idea? Like, killing annoying ads is fantastic, but wouldn't that break some websites?

It amounts to a gimmick no different than Firefox embedding the Disconnect lists as "tracking protection" in their browser. It's all bullshit, in case of Google, more so to give them another way to push their own ads over others, that's all.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:It amounts to a gimmick no different than Firefox embedding the Disconnect lists as "tracking protection" in their browser.

Which, I should note, is also great, but does break websites.

Thanks GµårÐïåñ.

I see it as nothing more than either gimmick to give users something the can get on their own (in case of FX being disconnect and control it themselves so if anything breaks, they can control the fix) or in case of google trying to implement something that allows them to take control over your choices. Why does a browser need to implement something that is already well implemented and is under user control and open source (while Chromium is open source, the crap known as Chrome is not, just like Dragon by Comodo isn't) so anytime they need to embed something in their code to remove control from the user and dictate behavior, I have an objection to.

Do you realize that this feature would give Google absolute control and knowledge to track everything you do, think about it, a blocker, be it ABP, uBlock or whatnot has to read EVERY URL, EVERY LINK, EVERY RESOURCE, to filter it, so now you can keep Google out by blocking their shit, you think if it was under their control, they would allow that? Plus, the very act of "intervening" on your behalf gives them access to things about your activity that you absolutely CANNOT do shit about to stop. Something to think about. Anytime something is part of the browser framework and out of user control, it leverages to the favor of the vendor. This is nothing more than them acknowledging they are losing to the adblocking crowd and trying to bring it in house so they can still get the data they are losing and continue their users = $$$ policy by circumventing the system to use an alternate way to the "cat and mouse" game of whack-a-mole with filters by just bypassing them at the core level.

From https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 ... -blocking/ -

Google is also offering a tool called "Funding Choices," which would present users who have non-Chrome ad blockers with a message asking them to disable their ad-blockers or pay to remove advertising.

A more evil implementation of the Adblock's "Acceptable Ads" program.

Again more of the same self serving ecosystem to lock people into their own ads.

The big remaining question is, will this lot be Chrome-specific, or will it be included in Chromium as well?
And what about downstream browsers like Vivaldi?

barbaz wrote:The big remaining question is, will this lot be Chrome-specific, or will it be included in Chromium as well?
And what about downstream browsers like Vivaldi?

Chances are even if for nothing more than appearances sake, they will probably keep it out of Chromium and keep it in Chrome, so they don't have to disclose open source their ways and tactics for their shady crap.

Thanks

EasyList forum thread: https://forums.lanik.us/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=36481

barbaz wrote:EasyList forum thread: https://forums.lanik.us/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=36481

effectively reiterates what I said, granted all speculation until we know but often if there is smoke, chances are there will be fire