Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 108409	2010-03-27 23:13:00	Ad blocking? please think again	Deimos (5715)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
870455	2010-03-28 03:22:00	I've always said they should only show ads to guests which has always been by far the majority. The break down right at this minute is 20 members, 150 guests and 80 spiders. It's as simple as wrapping the ads in <if condition="$show['guest']">...</if> and would appease the vocal registered members of this forum.	sal (67)
870456	2010-03-28 03:24:00	Mmm..... you're not the only one who's suggested that - it's a great idea. Sadly whoever is in charge of the forum advertising never listens :groan:.	Erayd (23)
870457	2010-03-28 03:30:00	Boy, if only someone could write an ad-blocker for television.	Richard (739)
870458	2010-03-28 04:03:00	Boy, if only someone could write an ad-blocker for television. The "MUTE" button on the 'cordless' remote, does it for me. Not quite as good as the "No junk Mail" notice on the letter box. But.... It's a start !! As an aside; I reckon that the OP. of this thread is "in the industry".... Probably, with "Fairfax" !! :2cents:	DUNK (1527)
870459	2010-03-28 04:20:00	It does. The blocking software looks at the markup that defines the page, and determines which external elements are advertising. It then blocks the browser from downloading those elements. The reason this works is that anything you see on a webpage other than text (and sometimes even text) must be downloaded separately from the rest of the page. Your browser requests the page markup first, then reads it to determine what additional resources it requires (e.g. stylesheets, javascript, images, embedded media, advertising). Anything that the adblocker says shouldn't be downloaded, isn't. Thanks for explaining how it all works Erayd I didn't know that but as someone once said knowledge is power ha ha, so by the time I die I should have a bit of power	gary67 (56)
870460	2010-03-28 04:29:00	I've always said they should only show ads to guests which has always been by far the majority. The break down right at this minute is 20 members, 150 guests and 80 spiders. It's as simple as wrapping the ads in <if condition=&quot;$show['guest']&quot;>...</if> and would appease the vocal registered members of this forum. If they done that I think I'd be to disgusted to even visit, Its bad enough now that new people aren't aware of what they are getting themselves into when they visit, The only way to make that worse would be to single them out for bad treatment.	Metla (12)
870461	2010-03-29 00:44:00	watch out, they might install the "miserable user" hack as well.... then there be real probs loading the page you wanted if they activated it on particular users lmao oh damn - better not give them idea's! I'll know what the prob is if MY Pf1 pages now start loading extremely slow and random 404's etc haha - and I don't have the adds here either. It's also the ONLY site I block them at as well....	bevy121 (117)
870462	2010-03-29 00:54:00	Right, there was actually a time before PF1 and before Google....I remember it well.:lol: The funny thing is, when I blow my 1gb cap and surf the net at 64kbps it takes about 2minutes to load sites like stuff with JS and pictures ie virtually unusable. Noscript is a slight hassle but a reasonable reaction to the situation.	pkm (13527)
870463	2010-03-29 01:32:00	Speaking of adblocking, has anyone heard of Comodo Dragon?? It uses Chrome's code, but they've stripped Google's code out of it. At least it doesnt need that googleupdate thing (I think this is whats needed), for the update option to work It can also use Chrome's extensions	Speedy Gonzales (78)
870464	2010-03-29 01:50:00	Boy, if only someone could write an ad-blocker for television. Been done, but sadly only for digital recording. I don't know if the techniques have been circumvented by the media barons, but it did work fairly reliably. Cheers Billy 8-{)	Billy T (70)
1 2 3 4 5