Most active commenters
  • kachapopopow(3)

←back to thread

Wayland Nvidia

(kextcache.com)
64 points breve | 18 comments | | HN request time: 0.227s | source | bottom
1. juliangmp ◴[] No.46193724[source]
Careful there, I was almost able to see some parts of the article through the ads
replies(2): >>46193772 #>>46194016 #
2. jjuel ◴[] No.46193772[source]
Came to say something about the ads too. Ended up not even reading the article it was so bad.
replies(1): >>46193825 #
3. kachapopopow ◴[] No.46193825[source]
It feels surprising that there's people on hackernews without adblock considering that adblock is not just for blocking ads, but also malware, illegal tracking and blocking annoying and useless banners.
replies(5): >>46193860 #>>46193925 #>>46193964 #>>46194101 #>>46216288 #
4. mnmalst ◴[] No.46193860{3}[source]
Totally agree. Every time I see someone complaining about ads, I think "What ads?"
replies(1): >>46193944 #
5. nottorp ◴[] No.46193925{3}[source]
Well I run an ad blocker too, but maybe we should try browsing submitted URLs without blocking ads and only upvote them IF we can still read them like that.
replies(1): >>46197094 #
6. a012 ◴[] No.46193944{4}[source]
Their adblock shamming overlay is also blocking part of the screen (on mobile) by the way
replies(2): >>46194000 #>>46194514 #
7. iAMkenough ◴[] No.46193964{3}[source]
My browser automatically blocked something that's triggering an overlay to "Disable any DNS / Extension Based AdBlocker to Continue" with no option to dismiss.

So the people on Hackernews with adblock aren't reading this.

replies(4): >>46194013 #>>46194091 #>>46194177 #>>46194524 #
8. kachapopopow ◴[] No.46194000{5}[source]
brave seems to have some special sauce since it appears to be able to hide the fact that ads were removed. I am guessing they are doing so without triggering dom events.
9. kachapopopow ◴[] No.46194013{4}[source]
interesting, on brave such popup never came up.
replies(1): >>46202458 #
10. BearOso ◴[] No.46194016[source]
The terminal screenshots are terrible, too. They're using a non-monospace font and the kerning is messed up, making everything double-wide.
11. lawn ◴[] No.46194091{4}[source]
I did not get this on Firefox mobile using uBlock and JavaScript disabled.
12. temp0826 ◴[] No.46194101{3}[source]
HN has many ad-apologists. It's more ironic than surprising that there's complaints.
13. PoisedProto ◴[] No.46194177{4}[source]
I was able to read it perfectly while using uBlock.
14. prmoustache ◴[] No.46194514{5}[source]
Don't see that overlay on fennec + adblock, what are you using?
15. prmoustache ◴[] No.46194524{4}[source]
no overlay here on fennec + ublock.

Reader mode also available but not even needed.

16. everdrive ◴[] No.46197094{4}[source]
I take a similar approach, but with noscript. If you cannot read it without enabling js, then I won't read the article.
17. wafflemaker ◴[] No.46202458{5}[source]
Brave is automatically using some list to disable "cookie banners". The kind of thing that you need to manually turn on in uBlock.
18. juliangmp ◴[] No.46216288{3}[source]
I use an app called harmonic to browse HN, if I open a link externally Firefox for android opens it with ublock installed. But the first glance of the article I get is with the default web view.

And a lot of places have ads that are okay. I mean I still dislike them, but they don't block half the page as in this instance. And when I see that I won't even bother to open it in Firefox.