Youtube can disable your adblock it seems.

[DRDNA]

Yes, they've got this "safe ads" program where companies can pay them to white list their ads if they conform ABP's non-intrusiveness rules. Controversial and open to corruption, but great in principle as an independent regulator would be a good idea.

It could be that not so unintrusive ads can also appear maybe...

I'm not saying that Ublock is above doing this in the future but it seems that they haven't yet. If they roll over to the Love of Money then I will leave them too.

 

[taz420nj]

Yes, they've got this "safe ads" program where companies can pay them to white list their ads if they conform ABP's non-intrusiveness rules. Controversial and open to corruption, but great in principle as an independent regulator would be a good idea.

It could be that not so unintrusive ads can also appear maybe...

.. and you can opt out of those whitelisted ads with two clicks. The whole hissy fit over the "acceptable ads" program is over absolutely nothing. I use uBo in Chrome simply because it seems to be better written and causes less resource drain/sluggishness. But when you've opted out of the "acceptable ads" there is absolutely no difference in the ad blocking abilities since they both use the exact same lists.

 

[qubit]

.. and you can opt out of those whitelisted ads with two clicks. The whole hissy fit over the "acceptable ads" program is over absolutely nothing. I use uBo in Chrome simply because it seems to be better written and causes less resource drain/sluggishness. But when you've opted out of the "acceptable ads" there is absolutely no difference in the ad blocking abilities since they both use the exact same lists.

Yes, I know one can opt out of them.

If you think being open to corruption is a hissy fit, then you have bigger problems my friend.

 

[taz420nj]

Yes, I know one can opt out of them.

If you think being open to corruption is a hissy fit, then you have bigger problems my friend.

As long as you can opt out of said "corruption", does it really matter? The lists are not secret or closed. Anything they blacklist and whitelist is visible and editable to all that use it. They can't "sneak" anything in there. If they start hardcoding whitelisted ads for money, Eyeo would dissolve overnight. It's that simple.

 

[SomeOne99h]

Yes, I know one can opt out of them.

If you think being open to corruption is a hissy fit, then you have bigger problems my friend.

You seem to misunderstood him
taz420nj told you what is the hissy fit "But when you've opted out of the "acceptable ads" there is absolutely no difference in the ad blocking abilities since they both use the exact same lists."
Also, I was one of earlier adaptors of AdblockPlus. It has became popular when others aren't or not available yet. Adblockplus got targeted really hard. To say they really got paid? I only saw it and still see it merely a hearsay. Adblockplus target was to block the bad internet experience inducing ads. To assert that, they made the whitelist, the middle road of ads not being harsh on you.

 

[taz420nj]

Yes, I know one can opt out of them.

If you think being open to corruption is a hissy fit, then you have bigger problems my friend.

You seem to misunderstood him
taz420nj told you what is the hissy fit "But when you've opted out of the "acceptable ads" there is absolutely no difference in the ad blocking abilities since they both use the exact same lists."
Also, I was one of earlier adaptors of AdblockPlus. It has became popular when others aren't or not available yet. Adblockplus got targeted really hard. To say they really got paid? I only saw it and still see it merely a hearsay. Adblockplus target was to block the bad internet experience inducing ads. To assert that, they made the whitelist, the middle road of ads not being harsh on you.

Exactly. I was also an early ABP adopter, and I used them LONG after the whole Acceptable Ads backlash - because you can very easily and permanently opt out during the initial configuration. (and again, I only switched to uBo because it just seems to work more smoothly). I also understand the AA initiative, because content providers do rely on ad revenue, and if the ad provider conforms to the non-intrusive requirements, they should be allowed to be shown to those who haven't opted out. As for the "fee" that they pay, I see it as an accountability. A farm that is paying a hefty fee to certify that their ads are non-intrusive is far more likely to vet the ads and not allow violations of the agreement.

 

[OneMoar]

if you give advertisers a inch they take a mile the whole acceptable ads is bull

 

[taz420nj]

if you give advertisers a inch they take a mile the whole acceptable ads is bull

LOL ok bro. Back here on earth, until/unless they remove the opt-out, they can take all the "bribe money" they can and I won't give a crap how non-intrusive or completely obnoxious the "acceptable ads" that they approve are. Why? Because I unchecked that box that says "show me acceptable ads" and don't see them anyway, so what the advertisers do or how many miles they take does not affect me in any way shape or manner. Let Eyeo make all the money they can off the advertisers. Good for them.

 

[qubit]

@SomeOne99h @taz420nj The corruption bit stems from who are ABP to become self-styled advertising gatekeepers when they are a for-profit company who inherently have vested interests. Ideally, you'd want an independent regulator set up for this kind of thing who wouldn't have a vested interested one way or another. And yeah, I know, I know, they can easily be corrupted too, but hopefully less likely. One can't win! lol.

 

[taz420nj]

@SomeOne99h @taz420nj The corruption bit stems from who are ABP to become self-styled advertising gatekeepers when they are a for-profit company who inherently have vested interests. Ideally, you'd want an independent regulator set up for this kind of thing who wouldn't have a vested interested one way or another. And yeah, I know, I know, they can easily be corrupted too, but hopefully less likely. One can't win! lol.

Again, as long as you can opt out, why does it matter? Who cares? What difference does it make how much they charge or what ads they allow? If you opt out, you don't see anything. The day they hardcode an ad whitelist or remove the opt out is the day the company dies. So they have incentive to stay "non corrupt" about it.

 

[DRDNA]

Again, as long as you can opt out, why does it matter? Who cares? What difference does it make how much they charge or what ads they allow? If you opt out, you don't see anything. The day they hardcode an ad whitelist or remove the opt out is the day the company dies. So they have incentive to stay "non corrupt" about it.

late last year I did opt out and still there was tons of ads on yahoo's front page and thats why I said I leave the ones that roll over to the love of money and turned to Ublock Origin as I didn't have problems with the miracle ads that made it by others for what ever that reason may be. Me I leave em behind like old used up memories. I loath opening a supposed news article on yahoo just to see I clicked on an ad disguised as a news article with a really hard to see faded out text that stated it as an Ad. Uggg to them imposters!

 

[taz420nj]

ORLY? I don't see any. When changes are made to the pages themselves sometimes it takes a little bit for the filters to catch up. I use Yahoo and MSN as the examples to my customers as to why they need an adblocker. The one I show them is ABP.

 

[qubit]

Again, as long as you can opt out, why does it matter? Who cares? What difference does it make how much they charge or what ads they allow? If you opt out, you don't see anything. The day they hardcode an ad whitelist or remove the opt out is the day the company dies. So they have incentive to stay "non corrupt" about it.

That's only true up to a point. Corruption can work in many funny ways that aren't obvious to us now.