Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocking Superweapon
- Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 14:44:27 -0700
- From: Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Princeton’s Ad-Blocking Superweapon
My bloviated meandering follows what Sailfish graced us with on 4/21/2017 7:02 AM:
My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on 4/20/2017 11:52 PM:Looking over the Members more carefully, I notice that neither Microsoft (Bing and IE) not Mozilla (Firefox) are included. If this group is deciding ad standards, it seem important that they should include both of them; otherwise, they will be giving Google a significant competitive advantage in providing agreed on solutions before either of the other two will have a chance to catch up.On 4/20/2017 12:10 PM, Sailfish wrote: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.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.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).
I'm left wondering whether this was an open buy-in membership and Microsoft and Mozilla declined to participate or was it not even offered. Anyone know the specifics?
-- Sailfish Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general