280
Privacy advocate challenges YouTube's ad blocking detection (www.theregister.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Privacy advocate challenges YouTube's ad blocking detection::Irish eyes may not be smiling

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 32 points 2 years ago (3 children)

the web server? absolutely!

the arbitrary code they send to my browser? I must be able to choose what to execute in my device.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] -17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    and people wonder why everything is entirely moving to subscriptions.

    You are able to choose because they let you. You don't think they know that? They own their own browser for god sakes. They could turn every adblock ineffective and not care for mouth breathers like you claiming victory by using applications and adblock lists someone else make, who would shit themselves if they stopped being maintained for a few days.

    Don't make yourself feel like you beat the Big Tech. It's anything but…

    Enjoy yourself feeling like a h4x0r though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Do you think it’s the fault of people with ad-blockers that everything is transitioning to subscription services? Or do you think maybe it has something to do with the exponentially larger profit to be made with the subscription model?

    It really looks like you’re just angry at this one person, and you kinda shaped your argument to be the meanest thing possible for them. But it left you looking like a shill for google who can’t decide which fight they wanna have.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -25 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Media hosting is not “arbitrary code” and costs money. Just saying don’t be surprised when a site prevents you from using a service without paying for it in some way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    they detect adblock by executing proprietary JavaScript code in my browser, using my CPU cycles. I paid for that CPU and I can choose what code gets executed and what not.

    That JavaScript code is also privacy invasive and I'm not letting a mega corporation recollect information about myself. So yeah, I'll block whatever I want from my browser. And if that makes Google loose money, they are more than welcomed to look for a business model other than advertising.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -25 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    That JavaScript code is also privacy invasive

    As a web developer seeing an end user say this is hilarious. Hate to break it you but there are much better ways to track you.

    If you’re that paranoid just use a VPN and never enter personal information on the internet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago

    I prefer to use Tor, but whatever makes you happy.

    Client side code isn't the only way to track someone, but it's one of the options. And fingerprinting browsers using JavaScript is an extended practice.

    Anyway, you're missing my point. My browser, my rules. I'll just block any script that annoys me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent