So, as it's been a month since I had the AaK List, things have been fine until when going back to that same site I mentioned before, it seems that its people are trying to bypass its filters, giving me ads again. When I manually blocked them, I see that damned "ad-blocker page", AGAIN. I've been using that site for years and now, my faith in it has lost. This can't go on... and if I see any more sites doing the same thing, I swear, I will limit my Internet usage much less to the point it could come to nothing and to be fair, I don't want that. I just can't believe this is happening... all for the sake of the "modern web", eh?
It has nothing to do with the "modern web" and everything to do with the fact that servers and bandwidth are not free and many of these sites are run by companies that need to pay employees to maintain the site... not to mention other operating expenses and yes, profit as well.
I know that, but I feel it's being more forced upon than it used to be. It's like some obnoxious fat guy in a suit and tie always getting in your way and nagging about offers and other pointless crap each time you walk around metropolis, your local town and even in your own home.
I have found that adding sites to a "restricted sites" list in Internet Explorer will usually cause those ads (from those specific sites) to not display. If you are using Internet Explorer, you could try that. Other browsers might have similar features.
Oh really? I better look around Firefox to see if it has that sort of thing, unless someone else points that out quicker than me.
Install Ghostery,uBlock orgin,both adblocks,and tor browser
???
Profit!
No, not Ghostery.
Or Tor Browser. Every time someone says that, I always think of dealing with ransomware. And, I wonder what's the problem with Ghostery even though I've never heard of it.
Install Ghostery,uBlock orgin,both adblocks,and tor browser
???
Profit!
No, not Ghostery.
Or Tor Browser. Every time someone says that, I always think of dealing with ransomware. And, I wonder what's the problem with Ghostery even though I've never heard of it.
Ghostery isn't good at blocking trackers and it spies on you. BTW, I have no issues with the Tor Browser.
If nobody minds me bumping this after a long while, there's something else I want to address here, that I noticed only recently. Since replacing AdBlock Plus with uBlock Origin, which had improved on things a lot (such as faster loading times under Wikia, for some reason) and its anti-ad blocker script works like a charm, some sites are now circumventing this with something similar though so far, I've only seen it under ProBoards where, there's a little banner that would randomly appear from the bottom telling you once again, to turn off your ad-blocker. As if I would, you desperate moron. Even when I use the plug-in's handy Element Zapper to get rid of it, hoping that its gone forever, it would still return. Hear me out... I am NOT turning off my ad-blocker just for you because while your stupid wee ads may seem harmless by the look of them, they are likely to drop unwanted crap on my system because of some stupid coding they were made with.
Another thing... I don't know if some sites that force the anti ad-block crap would also make them lose their userbase in return, nevermind them losing their hard-earned revenue because, there's many folk that are on the same boat as me and all of us here. I believe Photobucket will fall to that fate as most have left the place for Imgur. I think these sits have the bloody cheek to say this sort of bullshit to us when malvertising had already become prevalent. If they did that say in 2008 or a bit earlier, we can accept because back then, malvertising was unheard of then, unless I'm wrong.
With this known, there's only a few sites I can trust now because of all this and, it could get worse. Even if uBlock Origin is our eternal friend until the day we die.
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.
Actually very interested in this. I am running DNS internally at home on Server 2012 R2 and have been trying to find a way to bulk import addresses of known ad provider IPs and just redirect them to either 127.0.0.1 or 192.168.1.50 (DC/DNS). If you know how to do this let me know.... I want to do it at the DNS server level, rather than editing the hosts file on every computer on my network.
I'm using BIND these days and have a bash script that pulls from http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/serverlis ... =plaintext and inserts it into a bind config that I import into the main config to keep things a little easier to manage.
But once upon a time, I did do the adblocking on Windows. That same site has a registry script to import the zones:
You know what else grinds my gears? Sites that hate private browsing just because they claim it "blocks ads" when in reality it doesn't.
For example: Several months ago, I tried to make another Google account for some experiment, but they wanted me to verify my phone number and I don't own a phone, so I couldn't. To attempt to get around this, I tried using temporary SMS phone number services, none of them worked unfortunately, but one of them denied me from viewing messages just because they noticed I was using private browsing, so they displayed this SOB message which says, and I quote:
"Do not use private browsing, it blocks ads."
Which is total bullshit since private browsing alone doesn't block ads in my experience, I even tried disabling adblock, didn't work. So I decided fuck it and not bother making the Google account. And to think that if Google didn't force us all to use phone activation, this wouldn't have fucking happened to me.
At this point, they should force website owners to pass an intelligence exam before being allowed to even own their own website, and I'd be willing to bet at least 90% of the fools who disallow adblock and private browsing users will fail it.
I want the 90s and 2000s internet to come back. Modern day internet sucks.
At this point, they should force website owners to pass an intelligence exam before being allowed to even own their own website, and I'd be willing to bet at least 90% of the fools who disallow adblock and private browsing users will fail it.
As well as those who block non-x64 users, Windows 95, Windows XP (remember, Windows 2000 doesn't exist), and every browser not coated in Chrome.
@KCompRoom2000 said:
You know what else grinds my gears? Sites that hate private browsing just because they claim it "blocks ads" when in reality it doesn't.
Weird... that's never happened to me. Although ironically, Google does recommend you to use private browsing if signing in on a device other than your own (but even that, it doesn't work).
Relevant update: Still using uBlock Origin. I love it so much.
@KCompRoom2000 said:
You know what else grinds my gears? Sites that hate private browsing just because they claim it "blocks ads" when in reality it doesn't.
I've started noticing that a bit lately. Especially on news sites, it's quite irritating...
Private browsing doesn't block ads.... It does, however, prevent tracking cookies so their ad partners can't track all the sites you visit. And in the modern day of trading user data like a currency, I guess I can then see the rationale for not wanting you to browse privately. Though I certainly don't agree with it.
I don't quite understand how they even block private browsing. When you open a private browsing window it should basically look like a brand new freshly installed browser that has never visited their site before. (and then gets uninstalled when you leave). Do they plan to block users with new computers?
@SomeGuy said:
I don't quite understand how they even block private browsing. When you open a private browsing window it should basically look like a brand new freshly installed browser that has never visited their site before. (and then gets uninstalled when you leave). Do they plan to block users with new computers?
I wondered that as well. I thought maybe it was being presented by the browser via user agent or something, but it looks like they’re looking at what API’s are available to infer that you’re in private browsing mode.
@KCompRoom2000 said:
You know what else grinds my gears? Sites that hate private browsing just because they claim it "blocks ads" when in reality it doesn't.
I've started noticing that a bit lately. Especially on news sites, it's quite irritating...
Private browsing doesn't block ads.... It does, however, prevent tracking cookies so their ad partners can't track all the sites you visit. And in the modern day of trading user data like a currency, I guess I can then see the rationale for not wanting you to browse privately. Though I certainly don't agree with it.
Many news sites are blocking Private windows because they usually have a paywall that goes up after viewing a few articles, and in private windows they can't track that.
Actually very interested in this. I am running DNS internally at home on Server 2012 R2 and have been trying to find a way to bulk import addresses of known ad provider IPs and just redirect them to either 127.0.0.1 or 192.168.1.50 (DC/DNS). If you know how to do this let me know.... I want to do it at the DNS server level, rather than editing the hosts file on every computer on my network.
This is how I do network-wide DNS ad blocking. I use a free service called AdGuard DNS, and use their DNS servers when I set up DNS forwarding:
It works pretty well. I sometimes use the TruTV app on my Fire stick, and once I set this up, all the commercials stopped.
Comments
Oh really? I better look around Firefox to see if it has that sort of thing, unless someone else points that out quicker than me.
???
Profit!
No, not Ghostery.
Ghostery isn't good at blocking trackers and it spies on you. BTW, I have no issues with the Tor Browser.
Another thing... I don't know if some sites that force the anti ad-block crap would also make them lose their userbase in return, nevermind them losing their hard-earned revenue because, there's many folk that are on the same boat as me and all of us here. I believe Photobucket will fall to that fate as most have left the place for Imgur. I think these sits have the bloody cheek to say this sort of bullshit to us when malvertising had already become prevalent. If they did that say in 2008 or a bit earlier, we can accept because back then, malvertising was unheard of then, unless I'm wrong.
With this known, there's only a few sites I can trust now because of all this and, it could get worse. Even if uBlock Origin is our eternal friend until the day we die.
Here's an anti-adblocker site that uBO Extra fixes: http://onmsft.com
I personally recommend this extension and am not affiliated with uBO Extra or its developer in any way.
Actually very interested in this. I am running DNS internally at home on Server 2012 R2 and have been trying to find a way to bulk import addresses of known ad provider IPs and just redirect them to either 127.0.0.1 or 192.168.1.50 (DC/DNS). If you know how to do this let me know.... I want to do it at the DNS server level, rather than editing the hosts file on every computer on my network.
But once upon a time, I did do the adblocking on Windows. That same site has a registry script to import the zones:
https://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/serverli ... 5Byear%5D=
I also used to use the CLI to add new zones:
There's also powershell commands to do this.
You know what else grinds my gears? Sites that hate private browsing just because they claim it "blocks ads" when in reality it doesn't.
For example: Several months ago, I tried to make another Google account for some experiment, but they wanted me to verify my phone number and I don't own a phone, so I couldn't. To attempt to get around this, I tried using temporary SMS phone number services, none of them worked unfortunately, but one of them denied me from viewing messages just because they noticed I was using private browsing, so they displayed this SOB message which says, and I quote:
"Do not use private browsing, it blocks ads."
Which is total bullshit since private browsing alone doesn't block ads in my experience, I even tried disabling adblock, didn't work. So I decided fuck it and not bother making the Google account. And to think that if Google didn't force us all to use phone activation, this wouldn't have fucking happened to me.
At this point, they should force website owners to pass an intelligence exam before being allowed to even own their own website, and I'd be willing to bet at least 90% of the fools who disallow adblock and private browsing users will fail it.
I want the 90s and 2000s internet to come back. Modern day internet sucks.
As well as those who block non-x64 users, Windows 95, Windows XP (remember, Windows 2000 doesn't exist), and every browser not coated in Chrome.
Weird... that's never happened to me. Although ironically, Google does recommend you to use private browsing if signing in on a device other than your own (but even that, it doesn't work).
Relevant update: Still using uBlock Origin. I love it so much.
I've started noticing that a bit lately. Especially on news sites, it's quite irritating...
Private browsing doesn't block ads.... It does, however, prevent tracking cookies so their ad partners can't track all the sites you visit. And in the modern day of trading user data like a currency, I guess I can then see the rationale for not wanting you to browse privately. Though I certainly don't agree with it.
I don't quite understand how they even block private browsing. When you open a private browsing window it should basically look like a brand new freshly installed browser that has never visited their site before. (and then gets uninstalled when you leave). Do they plan to block users with new computers?
I wondered that as well. I thought maybe it was being presented by the browser via user agent or something, but it looks like they’re looking at what API’s are available to infer that you’re in private browsing mode.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/chromes-more-private-incognito-mode-websites-can-still-detect-youre-using-it/
Many news sites are blocking Private windows because they usually have a paywall that goes up after viewing a few articles, and in private windows they can't track that.
Type your comment> @Ka0s said:
This is how I do network-wide DNS ad blocking. I use a free service called AdGuard DNS, and use their DNS servers when I set up DNS forwarding:
It works pretty well. I sometimes use the TruTV app on my Fire stick, and once I set this up, all the commercials stopped.