Technology

80724 readers

3134 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

783

Ad blocking is alive and well, despite Chrome's attempts to make it harder (www.theregister.com)

submitted 1 day ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/technology@lemmy.world

154 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] irate944@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My company forced us to use only Chrome on our PC's and one of the things I was worried about was the ads. I put youtube in the background while I work.

And I was surprised by how...... My experience was exactly the same as Firefox and Brave. Ok, actually, one or two ads managed to slip through and appeared in the front page - albeit rarely and randomly - but I never got those ads at the beginning of the video. On other websites, I never got ads.

I was wondering, then, if there was some catch. Maybe the trackers would still get through or something. But according to that link, not even that? lol

[–] TheMcG@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

I’m surprised by these results tbh. And it seems for most people there is no big difference. But I do think for power users the catch is still there.

Lazaros Papadopoulos, research assistant at Goethe University, told The Register in an email that the study used the default filter sets for the respective ad blocking extensions in order to mimic the behavior of the typical user and to ensure rule consistency.

They used the default rule sets. One of the major limitations of mv3 iirc is the number of block list urls you can have. Like I’ve added a number of additional items to block via additional lists which I believe is mostly not possible in mv3.

[–] CactusEcho@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Is there a way to block youtube ads on the tv? I have an android tv and using the youtube app is painfull... :-(

[–] ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

I don't think so, since YouTube runs their ads from the same servers as the videos. You need to use an alternate front end that doesn't serve ads to begin with. One thing I used to do too was run a VPN on my router in Japan, so I would get Japanese ads instead. There were way fewer ads, I would have no idea what they were advertising, and the few ads I would get were way more entertaining.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

pi-hole may be what you're gunning for.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My ad blocker won't let me watch YouTube...OR YouTube won't let me watch with an ad blocker. I don't care. No ads for ME.

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Hello Invidious, my old friend.

[–] vin@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 day ago

If google really wanted to, they can. But if you're so against ads, what's the point in showing them? Leaving a mechanism to block ads with default being with ads is net positive for google. Now, something like AdNauseum is what hurts google

load more comments