Comments on: Ad blocking begins to have an economic effect http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/ Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:44:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Andy http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-1901 Andy Sun, 06 Mar 2005 00:24:32 +0000 http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/#comment-1901 Hmmm, methinks I'd really want to visit a site real bad to go through turning blockers off just to please the person who runs it. Now let me see ... <em>Environmental, Chemistry & Hazardous Materials Information & Resources</em> ... nope, can't be bothered. I am sure my lost visit will be devestating. :) Hmmm, methinks I’d really want to visit a site real bad to go through turning blockers off just to please the person who runs it. Now let me see … Environmental, Chemistry & Hazardous Materials Information & Resources … nope, can’t be bothered. I am sure my lost visit will be devestating. :)

]]> By: Ken http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-1553 Ken Mon, 28 Feb 2005 03:05:33 +0000 http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/#comment-1553 The script works by testing for the presence or absence specific objects including images and for their CSS state. For those concerned about Lynx users or those who use dynamic Braille displays, have no fear. They are unaffected by this script. In fact, if you test the site using Lynx, you'll find that only does it work in Lynx, but that great pains have been taken to make it fairly Lynx/text browser friendly. How often do you find a site that actually thinks about text browsers and dynamic Braille displays? BTW: the reason Google's popup blocker does not cause problems when people are accessing my site is because I don't use popup ads, which is all Google's toolbar blocks (read my programming notes you quoted). The script works by testing for the presence or absence specific objects including images and for their CSS state. For those concerned about Lynx users or those who use dynamic Braille displays, have no fear. They are unaffected by this script. In fact, if you test the site using Lynx, you’ll find that only does it work in Lynx, but that great pains have been taken to make it fairly Lynx/text browser friendly. How often do you find a site that actually thinks about text browsers and dynamic Braille displays?

BTW: the reason Google’s popup blocker does not cause problems when people are accessing my site is because I don’t use popup ads, which is all Google’s toolbar blocks (read my programming notes you quoted).

]]> By: Josh http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-1549 Josh Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:17:33 +0000 http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/#comment-1549 If you turn off image loading, it behaves just the same as if you have adblocker running. Which is a bastard for the lynx user. This is consistent with my read of the code, which a) demands javascript; and b) checks for loaded images. From a javascript comment: <blockquote>// While trying to decode this script, please keep in mind that although we require users to // view our ads, WE DO NOT USE POPUPS, POPUNDERS nor rich media ads (e.g. flash). // Without advertising revenues to pay the cost of operating this site, it would not exist. // We simply ask that ALL USERS of this site, do their fair part in helping to pay the bills. // We do not ask users to act on our ads, only that the ads be allowed to display. </blockquote> Which repeats the argument I've listed above. Anyho, the code contains a <code>function hlcxxt()</code>, which I suspect is a function name with the 'xx' swapped for 'un'. Angry programmer. If you turn off image loading, it behaves just the same as if you have adblocker running. Which is a bastard for the lynx user. This is consistent with my read of the code, which a) demands javascript; and b) checks for loaded images.

From a javascript comment:

// While trying to decode this script, please keep in mind that although we require users to
// view our ads, WE DO NOT USE POPUPS, POPUNDERS nor rich media ads (e.g. flash).

// Without advertising revenues to pay the cost of operating this site, it would not exist.
// We simply ask that ALL USERS of this site, do their fair part in helping to pay the bills.
// We do not ask users to act on our ads, only that the ads be allowed to display.

Which repeats the argument I’ve listed above. Anyho, the code contains a function hlcxxt(), which I suspect is a function name with the ‘xx’ swapped for ‘un’. Angry programmer.

]]> By: Phil Bevan http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-1537 Phil Bevan Sun, 27 Feb 2005 00:43:20 +0000 http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/#comment-1537 I've just checked my settings and its set to run javascript. Most peculair. I’ve just checked my settings and its set to run javascript.

Most peculair.

]]> By: Daniel http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-1405 Daniel Fri, 25 Feb 2005 07:09:09 +0000 http://www.geekrant.org/2005/02/25/ad-blocking-begins-to-have-an-economic-effect/#comment-1405 Tried with IE and Google toolbar/ad-blocker. It showed a warning about Javascript, then loaded the page correctly. Does your setup not run Javascript properly or something? Tried with IE and Google toolbar/ad-blocker. It showed a warning about Javascript, then loaded the page correctly. Does your setup not run Javascript properly or something?

]]>