Web lists-archives.com

Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocking Superweapon

My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on 4/20/2017 11:52 PM:
On 4/20/2017 12:10 PM, Sailfish wrote:

It seems that Google had it's own, self-serving, response in waiting. It's unclear whether their approach would truly excise, or attempt the more difficult task of hiding the ad, (I suspect the former base on your article's position.) However, what I suspect is really the goal of *the largest ad revenue company in the world* is to focus on non-displaying pages that don't adhere to certain agreed on standards, perhaps with some confusing error display and, worst case, threaten to blacklist said sites from Google SERPs.

I don't like ads on websites, mainly because they are intentionally distracting, and tend to be annoying as well. If they flash, they are gone. If they play video, or sound, they are gone. If they just put up a text box, in an unused (for website data) area, they are tolerable. But I am sure that the limitations I mention wouldn't be satisfactory to any advertiser. It's an arms race that no one can win.

REF: https://www.betterads.org/standards/

[excerpt quote=\"
Initial Better Ads Standards: Least preferred ad experiences for desktop web and mobile web
\" /]

You should be pleased to know that tose and more are part of he proposed new standards (through link in WSJ in my last post).

Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
general mailing list