←back to thread

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

(0x44.xyz)
1034 points deryilz | 4 comments | 12 Jul 25 19:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.045s | source
Show context
breve ◴[12 Jul 25 21:51 UTC] No.44545498[source]▶
The best bypass is to use Firefox. uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

replies(5): >>44546244 #>>44546588 #>>44548771 #>>44548855 #>>44549135 #
aziaziazi ◴[13 Jul 25 09:14 UTC] No.44548771[source]▶
I can’t help seeing ad blockers as fairless content consumption, like choosing to download films, musics and books without paying the creator and the distributor (VOD, MOD, concerts, libraries…). Sounds great for you but how would that work if everyone would do the same?

Although we all be happy to se more competition, using an ad blocker on Google sites (and G-add financed-sites) have no positive effect for the competitors.

Don’t take me wrong, I hate Ads and Google methods but we can’t all rob the same store and hope there will be infinite food on the shelves and that the next store will benefit from that.

replies(10): >>44548863 #>>44548890 #>>44548900 #>>44548902 #>>44549013 #>>44549324 #>>44550227 #>>44551120 #>>44551981 #>>44552150 #
1. chgs ◴[13 Jul 25 09:34 UTC] No.44548863[source]▶
Almost all content I consume is not funded by adverts, it’s funded by passion or subscription or donation.

Adverts have no positive effects for anyone other than the advertising firm. They cost the viewer more than the provide the advertiser

replies(2): >>44548892 #>>44548893 #
2. tonyhb ◴[13 Jul 25 09:41 UTC] No.44548892[source]▶
if they’re not funded by adverts then you don’t need an ad blocker, right?
replies(1): >>44548919 #
3. ◴[13 Jul 25 09:41 UTC] No.44548893[source]▶
4. chgs ◴[13 Jul 25 09:46 UTC] No.44548919[source]▶
bbc news is full of tracking despite not showing adverts.