Some sites hate ad-blockers...

edited July 2017 in Software
I have noticed this for a while now, and it may be of no surprise to you as well, but it seems that nowadays, a lot of sites seem to a big problem with ad-blockers even with the glory that is AdBlockPlus. For some that I frequent or go on to briefly, I get a message telling me that I should disable ad-blocking just for the site itself to function properly. No way in hell am I doing that because as we know, nobody likes ads, even those that claim to be "less intrusive" which is a blatant lie. I don't know why such a thing would happen... and the back of my mind tells me that this may be a social media tactic also though I could be wrong. I know that AdBlockPlus has something to blank out these messages but if I recall correctly, only the Chrome version offers that option (not for Firefox unfortunately).

Is anybody else pissed off by this or is it just me?
«13

Comments

  • I've noticed this as well, but I ignore it. I block ads mostly for security and privacy reasons but they certainly are annoying, and they use up so much memory and slow my connection down. My myself use uBlock Origin, but I also do make use of my HOSTS file as well.
  • You know, I get the point that ads are basically the only reliable source of income for most of these websites.

    But it doesn't matter. When ads hog up all my computer's resources by using flash, plus having excessive animations that make me distracted, I'm not okay with that. Until ads become no longer intrusive, I'm not disabling AdBlock. And if they force me to, then I just leave the website. Besides that, ads still pose a risk of privacy and downloading malware through javascript. And pop-ups too, that's just not acceptable.

    I am not removing AdBlock on any website unless I truly support it (like this one, or some places where I KNOW that there's not going to be any annoyance or problem), at least not until ads stop being so intrusive, resource-hogging, potentially dangerous, and also often undesirable.
  • I'll disable add blockers the day serving up malware in ads is punishable by death. Then I will sit back and watch dickhead after dickhead get the electric chair.

    The worst part about this is that some of these sites are now serving up all content via scripting, rather than regular old HTML. Which has the side effect that everyone must be using the absolute latest version of one of three web browsers (Firefox, Chrome, and whatever Microsoft calls IE these days). Anything even slightly different, and no content for you!
  • Ads are cancer.
    The only time I disable adblock is to support a handful of youtubers, and their ads aren't usually that distracting or annoying.

    I use it for security reasons as well. I had a Windows installation killed once by a nasty Java script.

    pls stop with the malware ads b0ss
  • I was using an ad-block for quite some time simply because certain sites have ads that slow down your PC, Even if it's a good computer, If you google searched "ebay is slow" you'd see proof on that, So I use ad-block when browsing certain sites like that (including eBay).

    What I don't like is that some sites refuse to show content unless you disable your ad-block, I know some MIDI site I used to go to was like that, When I disabled my ad-block on that site, My PC was starting to slow down so I no longer visit that site. There was also some HP Drivers site that had that too which is why I just get individual drivers for my hardware when applicable, There are some sites (Like Yahoo and Hotmail) that let you use ad-block, But won't filter out ads at all in some cases.

    I add sites I support on my exception list such as this site and CPU-World which started doing that but at least their ads are tolerable to me, When this whole malvertising and flash ads stop, I'll finally stop using ad-block, Like that'll ever happen, I want the internet to go back to the way it was.
  • Ads are definitely fucking annoying. I've always been bothered by them for all the reasons mentioned here and also just for the fact that advertising in general is so scummy. It never ceases to amaze me the depths they'll sink to get you to buy something or usually just to implant the brand awareness into your mind.

    If I recall correctly, there was a framework released in recent times to check if users were using adblock or not and since then, I've noticed a lot more sites putting up messages about adblock.
    SomeGuy wrote:
    whatever Microsoft calls IE these days

    They call it IE. Edge is a new browser based more off of chrome than anything else.
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    I'll disable add blockers the day serving up malware in ads is punishable by death. Then I will sit back and watch dickhead after dickhead get the electric chair.

    I agree, minus the death part.
    SomeGuy wrote:
    The worst part about this is that some of these sites are now serving up all content via scripting, rather than regular old HTML. Which has the side effect that everyone must be using the absolute latest version of one of three web browsers (Firefox, Chrome, and whatever Microsoft calls IE these days). Anything even slightly different, and no content for you!

    Sometimes I have to deal with that since I use Pale Moon; I do understand the nonsense of websites ignoring standards and piling their websites with non-spec compliant scripts, and I don't like where the web is heading.
  • dosbox wrote:
    I agree, minus the death part
    Right, death is too good for them. Bamboo shoots under the fingernails, Chinese water torture, face stomped on with a boot, subject to constant 24-7 telemarketers, forced to use IE 4, etc. Sounds like a plan.
  • I want the internet to go back to the way it was.
    Same here, although I first used it in 2004 and even that things were simple then. By the way, if I suspect that every site will go the same way in the next five or ten years then I will lose all faith on the Internet, to the point I would unplug my router for good. This cannot go on, and even that I'm feeling the same mindset that Dosbox has also.
  • My thing is, Adblock does not stop jscript or other scripts from running. Plus, there are moves to work towards ads that bypass Adblock, or check if ads aren't running, or even if Adblock is installed.

    I do not use adblock for this reason.
    Personally, I am content with NoScript. It blocks off that junk at the cost of a few more nags(an info bar at the bottom, maybe a notification to donate here and there) or slightly broken pages. And it puts a degree of control over the website in my hands.
    Unsure if there's an equivalent for chrome, I don't use it. But I'd recomment NoScript to users who have some idea of how the web works.
  • I'm using adblock plus for firebox only to avoid the ads on youtube.
    I have no trouble on surfing the web due to adblock.
  • Site doesn't like that I use ABP? Site can go manipulate itself. I'm not turning it off.
  • I wonder if there's any Greasemonkey scripts that can hide these kind of messages from sites, considering I just got it myself today (although primarily used it to fix an issue on another site I go on). If not, would anyone here be kind enough to do that? I am aware that some sites have their own ways of expressing lament over ad-blocking being used whether its of simple text or some huge paragraph containing an image about it.
  • If a site complains that I have ad block, I remove the popup and continue. Ads are the worst and absolutely fucking shit.
  • Whats intreresting is that I was recently on one of my frequent sites, and I had decided to ban a bunch of crappy ad servers from my system using the router's firewall- and the stupid site actually told me I was using some sort of Ad block software!!! I would have figured that blocking at the level of the router would prevent this, as I'm not exactly sure how the main site can detect traffic to and from third party ad servers.
  • Whats intreresting is that I was recently on one of my frequent sites, and I had decided to ban a bunch of crappy ad servers from my system using the router's firewall- and the stupid site actually told me I was using some sort of Ad block software!!! I would have figured that blocking at the level of the router would prevent this, as I'm not exactly sure how the main site can detect traffic to and from third party ad servers.

    It detects the lack of ads on the page, and then complains the ads arent there and as such youre using an adblocker.
  • scheurneus wrote:
    Whats intreresting is that I was recently on one of my frequent sites, and I had decided to ban a bunch of crappy ad servers from my system using the router's firewall- and the stupid site actually told me I was using some sort of Ad block software!!! I would have figured that blocking at the level of the router would prevent this, as I'm not exactly sure how the main site can detect traffic to and from third party ad servers.

    It detects the lack of ads on the page, and then complains the ads arent there and as such youre using an adblocker.

    Yeah. Hulu was the first site I can recall going to that started doing this. I've been using DNS blacklists for adblocking for years now and when Hulu first launched I actually didn't realize it even had ads because it would just continue playing without any interruptions... then they started detecting that their ad wasn't loading and would insert a mandatory 30 second placeholder any time an ad couldn't load.
  • You know what would be worse than sites having a problem of you using an ad-blocker? Finding yourself banned from it for the same reason. I don't think anyone dumb enough would go to that extreme but if it did someday (touch wood), then that would be terrible.
  • Bry89 wrote:
    You know what would be worse than sites having a problem of you using an ad-blocker? Finding yourself banned from it for the same reason. I don't think anyone dumb enough would go to that extreme but if it did someday (touch wood), then that would be terrible.

    I'm not sure they'd go to quite that extreme, because ultimately they want you there because you're valuable as a view / click... so more likely what will continue happening is sites that severely limit functionality or otherwise outright prevent you from using the site unless you unblock ads.
  • Well if they decide to do that, then that's their problem. The thing is, do they even now how many people out there block ads by default? There's a lot of folk that use the Internet and that a high percentage of them block ads anyway, as far as I know.

    Although, I wonder when this all started... I first came across such message three years ago and the first time I saw that, I was like "Eh, what the fuck? You clearly have issues mate".
  • There were one or two sites that started it years ago. But like I said before, I believe the rise in sites doing this now is thanks to a framework that was released recently to make it easy to detect when ads aren't loading.
  • Forbes and Wired won't let you on their sites if you adblock.
  • As far as anybody should be concerned, those sites don't exist any more.

    Anyone who browses the "modern" web without an ad blocker is a complete idiot. It doesn't matter how reliable you think that site you are visiting is, ad companies are the scum of the earth and will gladly inject malware and abuse tracking data at the drop of a hat.

    If you like browsing without an ad blocker, you might also like getting rid of your virus scanner, and running around with your pants down.
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    If you like browsing without an ad blocker, you might also like getting rid of your virus scanner, and running around with your pants down.
    Very good point, sir. And yeah, the web has become "modern" alright... when most are built for mobile and when viewed on a desktop/laptop, there's a lot of space on both sides. Not very clever, is it? In relation of what you said though, surfing the web without an ad-blocker is like playing Russian roulette. You're just chancing your luck.

    By the way, I came across this to solve everyone's problems. I've not installed it myself yet but I might in the near future, should this whole baloney get any worse.
  • SomeGuy wrote:
    As far as anybody should be concerned, those sites don't exist any more.

    Anyone who browses the "modern" web without an ad blocker is a complete idiot. It doesn't matter how reliable you think that site you are visiting is, ad companies are the scum of the earth and will gladly inject malware and abuse tracking data at the drop of a hat.

    If you like browsing without an ad blocker, you might also like getting rid of your virus scanner, and running around with your pants down.

    I perfectly agree.
  • Bry89 wrote:
    SomeGuy wrote:
    If you like browsing without an ad blocker, you might also like getting rid of your virus scanner, and running around with your pants down.
    Very good point, sir. And yeah, the web has become "modern" alright... when most are built for mobile and when viewed on a desktop/laptop, there's a lot of space on both sides. Not very clever, is it? In relation of what you said though, surfing the web without an ad-blocker is like playing Russian roulette. You're just chancing your luck.
    Wow, I didn't know how bad the internet has gone today, This is pretty much why all I do on the internet these days is check some boards and look up stuff on Wikipedia.

    Also, Since this is a topic about ad-blocking, I thought this might interest you (or might not), I've found out that the 4 major US broadcasting networks (Including Fox) are trying to find ways to make the fast-forward button out of place on a DVR remote by blocking the ability to fast-forward on their DVR recordings, I could see some people giving up their DVRs in favor of VCRs because of this, Although IMO that wouldn't work out well due to how different those 2 devices are.

    Yeah. I can see why browsing the web on an old OS (such as Windows XP) is a bad idea nowadays, Time to find the Web Of Trust browser extension and install that.
  • Also, Since this is a topic about ad-blocking, I thought this might interest you (or might not), I've found out that the 4 major US broadcasting networks (Including Fox) are trying to find ways to make the fast-forward button out of place on a DVR remote by blocking the ability to fast-forward on their DVR recordings, I could see some people giving up their DVRs in favor of VCRs because of this, Although IMO that wouldn't work out well due to how different those 2 devices are.
    That's nothing new. They were up in arms back in the days when the Tivo was new because it let viewers skip commercials. "Wahhhhh". I was under the impression most DVRs already had restrictions. Most of the ones I researched (ages ago, so way out of date) were tied to services and did not allow moving videos to other machines for viewing with normal media players. Why would anyone want something locked down like that? Oh, it probably had blue LEDs so it looked cool. Those eye-fuckers in control of the media won't be happy until everyone is physically chained to their chair with blinders holding their eyes open while commercials play 24 hours a day.

    They also had a shit fit when VCRs were new, but somehow they didn't get their way.

    Personally, I still use a VCR. As much as any recording device would get used today, as there is nothing worth recording any more.
    Yeah. I can see why browsing the web on an old OS (such as Windows XP) is a bad idea nowadays, Time to find the Web Of Trust browser extension and install that.
    If you think your latest and greatest Windows tehn is perfectly secure, come back in a year and see how many exploits have been found. Now realize that the bad guys likely know about those NOW. Using a well patched OS is only a small piece of the security puzzle.
  • Fast forwarding commercials should be the least of their worries these days as more and more people move to streaming media online.
  • VCR quality is really shitty, and I don't get why you would want to use one for recording TV. Haven't people heard of recording devices you hook up to an HDMI port on their TVs?
  • dosbox wrote:
    VCR quality is really shitty, and I don't get why you would want to use one for recording TV. Haven't people heard of recording devices you hook up to an HDMI port on their TVs?
    VCR quality is ok. The up side to VHS is that most people are starting to give away their movies in VHS form from next to nothing. I have 1 VCR, and +40 movies in VHS. Not to mention the first 3 Star Wars movies ( IV, V, VI) in a collectors edition box, (got it for free).. Although I don't usually record stuff on the VCR. Kind of think of it, the last thing I recorded was Jack Ass 3D on Comedy central in 2014...
    Yeah. I can see why browsing the web on an old OS (such as Windows XP) is a bad idea nowadays, Time to find the Web Of Trust browser extension and install that.
    I have heard that some people will go to as far as making a vm just to browse the web.
Sign In or Register to comment.