Google Will Build an Ad-Blocker into Chrome

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
This could be a strange decision for Google, an ad-oriented company, but the inclusion of a native ad-blocker is likely a defensive maneuver: Google’s blocker would only block specific, “bad” ads, and that may be good enough to convince Chrome users not to install a third-party extension, which would block all ads. Some say that this is another antitrust case waiting to happen.

The ad-blocking feature, which could be switched on by default within Chrome, would filter out certain online ad types deemed to provide bad experiences for users as they move around the web. Google could announce the feature within weeks, but it is still ironing out specific details and still could decide not to move ahead with the plan, the people said. Unacceptable ad types would be those recently defined by the Coalition for Better Ads, an industry group that released a list of ad standards in March. According to those standards, ad formats such as pop-ups, auto-playing video ads with sound and “prestitial” ads with countdown timers are deemed to be “beneath a threshold of consumer acceptability.”
 
This isn't a terrible idea on their end. After all, Google is a advertising company and ad block is fucking their shit up. They obviously won't block their ads, just everyone else's. It's a win win for them. Their ads get shown, while everyone is happy to have an ad blocker. That doesn't mean people won't install ad blockers still.
 
I hate annoying ads, but it feels like Google has complete control of the internet. Websites are forced to respond to every little thing they do when it comes to their changing search algorithms and things like this. When they changed their search algorithm to prefer mobile-ready designs, the look of most every website I frequent changed overnight to bland generic looking responsive designs with interfaces that aren't desktop friendly.

Google can ruin far too many online entities' business and livelihood with a snap of their fingers. I'm not sure what the answer is. I wouldn't call Google a monopoly; there are many competitors out there in most every endeavor Google undertakes. They just aren't successful enough to be a challenge.
 
Personally I don't have problems with ads, hardly notice them. The only sites that have issues with ads imo are just click bait garbage anyways and session gets closed.
 
Personally I don't have problems with ads, hardly notice them. The only sites that have issues with ads imo are just click bait garbage anyways and session gets closed.

You don't have an issue with ads on youtube that are inserted into the video you want to watch? Without an ad blocker there is no way I could enjoy youtube and I just would not use it if I didn't use uBlock.
 
Everything is click bait. Lol

The internet at the start never used to be like that.....

Hell it's a news story that you might be able to apply your life towards!!!! lets click on it and get the companies Rich......
 
I don't mind ads so much, as long as they don't interfere with my ability to read the content. The ads that pop over everything and the ones that insert on top of text of the article, and pop up a huge ad that blocks my reading if I happen to accidentally mouse over the word, are the specific reasons why I install an ad blocker. I want those to stop. If the content providers want me to stop blocking their ads, then they need to get rid of the ad providers that do those things. Simple solution.
 
google, an ad company, will build an ad blocker even though the market already has tons of add ons to block ads?
If this is real, then i suspect that google ads won't be blocked, right?
 
This is for the masses who will see that Chrome already has a built in ad-blocker

listicles_com.jpg


so will think that installing an ad-blocking extension will be unnecessary,

ad-fail.jpg


Somehow, Google ads will still magically make their way into Chrome

bizarre-ads02_free-jokes-online_com.jpg


as well as perhaps through other methods as well.. like forum posts!!

funny-advertisements-5.jpg
 
Even if you pay for you media you still have to view ads. I pay for cable and I still have to view commercials.

I trust a Google ad-blocker as much as I trust Google. Which is nil.

How advertising companies convinced us we needed them is the greatest trick ever.
 
Even if you pay for you media you still have to view ads. I pay for cable and I still have to view commercials.

I trust a Google ad-blocker as much as I trust Google. Which is nil.

How advertising companies convinced us we needed them is the greatest trick ever.
The didn't trick us to need them. They just shovel them down our throat when ever possible wanted or not.
 
sounds like total anti-trust to me. But on some sites the ads are so obnoxious with all their fake download links and stuff that I can't honestly recommend any user not have an ad blocker so a default one may be ok from a usability point of view.
 
My main concern- and use for an adblocker- is to block virus-delivering ads. An adblocker is like a broad-spectrum inoculation for that. If Google can do a good job checking ads for malware- that'd certainly make a difference.

(and like many of you probably have, I've had AV/anti-malware catch stuff ads tried to serve, on sites that use ads but aren't big enough to curate them...)
 
Strange decision? Brilliant decision.


Why spend ad money with Facebook if chrome blocks all your ads?
 
My main concern- and use for an adblocker- is to block virus-delivering ads. An adblocker is like a broad-spectrum inoculation for that. If Google can do a good job checking ads for malware- that'd certainly make a difference.

(and like many of you probably have, I've had AV/anti-malware catch stuff ads tried to serve, on sites that use ads but aren't big enough to curate them...)
I had one try to come in from outlook.com once, even.
 
I welcome Google's addition to block advertisements, but I doubt Google will handle it properly considering they are the pot calling the kettle black. Instead, I wish they would create an API to allow 3rd party developers to use plugins. I know it's not simple, but I would rather have a Ghostery, uBlock Origin or AdBlock Plus plugin for Google Chrome. That way, I can decide what gets blocked and what doesn't, not Google.
 
this sounds more like an attempt to shut down adblocker plus who is profiting off their adblocker by allowing companies to pay them not to block their ad's.
 
Just remembered I used a web browser recently with a built in ad-blocker and sure enough I dumped it because it only blocked some ads. Can't remember what the browser was now.
 
How is including an ad blocker an antitrust case?

Anyway no one gives a shit about monopolies anymore. Microsoft is still bundling Edge with Win10, antivirus, and other programs and no one bats an eye.
 
Well, Google did basically popularize the popup blocker (with their toolbar), and get browser companies to include that out of the box, so.....
 
We don't have Governance any longer, so there will be no Anti-Trust actions. ... When the mergers/acquisitions end in one giant Corp, Raccoon Corp, and some chick named Alice busts through the door, you better do what she says. Just say'n.
 
If it blocks this new goddamn trend of full screen interstitial elements that fade the background and obscure the entire fucking screen I'm down with it.
 
How is including an ad blocker an antitrust case?

Anyway no one gives a shit about monopolies anymore. Microsoft is still bundling Edge with Win10, antivirus, and other programs and no one bats an eye.

Probably because they don't control the market for any of those things.

You may want to double check what monopoly means.
 
Sorry, they could put the greatest adblocker ever in the browser, and I'd still use a third party adblocker.

I simply don't fucking trust Google.
 
It might not show some ads but make no mistakes that Google are getting what they want out of you somehow.

and yeah...we're supposed to be what....grateful? Grateful for not having to eat the crap sandwich that they themselves cooked up? The crap is the same but now just smothered in mayo.
 
Last edited:
You don't have an issue with ads on youtube that are inserted into the video you want to watch? Without an ad blocker there is no way I could enjoy youtube and I just would not use it if I didn't use uBlock.

No I don't... Most ads can be skipped after a few seconds... and if I am unwilling to wait 15 seconds for a forced ad, the video must not be worth watching since those ads... ahem help pay for the free service. I just don't find the amount of ads to be obscene. Even on youtube (ads don't pop for me on EVERY video) and certainly not the static ones on sites like [H] (Those popup over article ones are annoying but I don't visit those sites much, lucky me).

I certainly would understand and support the idea of a pay to remove ads (youtube red????), while I might not do it, I could see how others would find value in that.

Don't get me wrong, I think there is a time to buck the system. I just personally don't find my usage of youtube and over all internet (ads) are enough for me to do so.

I do pirate TV Shows because I literally cannot pay for the experience I want (I am more than willing to pay). Maybe I consume TV at the same level as you consume YouTube and our frustration is similar and thus we employ similar methods of dealing with it?
 
And you won't be able to view the arrogant pages that refuse to show the content when they detect an adblocker. Win-win.
 
And you won't be able to view the arrogant pages that refuse to show the content when they detect an adblocker. Win-win.

I literally blacklist those sites on the firewall. I'm not getting into a pissing match with them.
 
lol freaking parasites, "cuz dont be evil bro", ghostery, and fuckem all.
 
Back
Top