how-to block ads
|
wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·BroadVoice
| reply to swhx7
Re: What about Google?
said by swhx7  :Unfortunately you are misunderstanding several things and the person you're replying to is correct. 1. Website owners contract with Google and put the Google tags in their own pages to get the benefits - ad revenue, analytics. Nebuad, however, adds javascript into pages and cookies into headers by forgery, without permission of website owners. Only some site owners contract for the Nebu-ized ads but all get their pages tagged on the way to the site visitor because that's how Nebuad builds the profiles on web users. Correct. And ISP's contract with Nebuad for their ad revenue and analytics. No difference, other that who is getting paid.
said by swhx7 :2. "those 3rd parties actually incorportate the Google tracking mechanism without you realizing" - Every major browser has a "view source" option. Anyone astute enough to be reading this can simply look and see whether there are links to Google stuff in the page. I have bad news for you. If you have opened the page and then checked the "view source" option, then you have already loaded the Google code! All that enables you to do is check after the fact if Google had code embedded in the page. Furthermore, assuming you can find the Google specific code, what will you do then?
said by swhx7 :3. "methods are slightly different (but just as easy to block/opt out for those intelligent enough to figure out how" - You can prevent your browser from ever retrieving a single cookie or script from Google by simply black-holing certain domains. Now explain, please, how the customer of a Nebuad-using ISP can prevent his traffic from going through the Nebuad machine? There's no way unless the ISP offers a true opt-out. As has been discussed numerous times on this site, you can take measures to block Nebuad from tracking your data and serving you ads. Keep in mind that the company is also telling you that they arent doing anything with your data, and until that is proven false (or we have lots of evidence to the contrary) there is no reason to doubt them.
said by swhx7 :4. "Nebuad isnt doing anything different than what Google and countless other search engines are doing today" - When websites serve cookies and scripts on a "clean" (non-Nebu-ized ) internet connection , the user can accept or reject each item (or decide whether to let his browser request them in the first place), and can be confident that a request to a given server really retrieves only from that server. Nebuad (if it works like Phorm) intercepts 100% of a person's web traffic, coming and going, data-mines it and inserts foreign content forged to appear as coming from remote domains. Claiming that there isn't "anything different" between these scenarios is either ignorance or shilling for the spybox people. Even Karl pointed out that what you describe isnt happening here
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-
| |
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
edit:
June 26th, @03:53PM
| said by wifi4milez :And ISP's contract with Nebuad for their ad revenue and analytics. No difference, other that who is getting paid.
Case 1: A sends B a message via messenger M, and agrees to include C's ad, and M delivers it unmolested. This is perfectly legitimate.
Case 2: A sends B a message via messenger M, with or without C's ad, and M opens it and reads it for benefit of D, without consent of either A or B. This is radically different. (The fact that D is "contracting for" this is irrelevant, it's still interference with other people's communications.)
said by wifi4milez :I have bad news for you. If you have opened the page and then checked the "view source" option, then you have already loaded the Google code! All that enables you to do is check after the fact if Google had code embedded in the page. Furthermore, assuming you can find the Google specific code, what will you do then?
Wrong again. It's easiest to explain with an example. A request from my browser to pagead2.google.com may be issued by the browser, but will never get past my router. So the script is never retrieved, much less executed. But I can still look in the page source and see:
<script src="http://pagead2.google.com/ ... >
Besides, a user may load it one time, and block it on another occasion.
said by wifi4milez :said by swhx7 : ...how [can] the customer of a Nebuad-using ISP can prevent his traffic from going through the Nebuad machine? There's no way unless the ISP offers a true opt-out. ... the company is also telling you that they arent doing anything with your data, and until that is proven false (or we have lots of evidence to the contrary) there is no reason to doubt them.
So now you're no longer denying the wholesale wiretapping, something profoundly different from websites serving cookies and scripts - but now you just defend it by saying it's harmless because you trust the spybox companies to "do no evil" (beyond the spying itself). But the spying itself is what a lot of people object to. I don't believe anything said by a company in such a sleazy business, either, but that's secondary. We shouldn't have to take their word for anything because they shouldn't be allowed in a position where they have the power to harvest all the data. Industry self-regulation has never worked for the protection of citizens in any scenario, ever.
said by wifi4milez :Even Karl pointed out that what you describe isnt happening here
What Karl was saying there was that Nebuad doesn't replace ads that site owners have contracted for with other ads of its own. That is true. My point is that the user-tracking and proxying techniques involve the spybox impersonating sites, injecting cookies into headers, and appending javascripts - as explained in funchords' study and elsewhere - and intecepting communications of non-consenting others. This is indeed radically different from sites serving cookies and scripts. (And Karl, in the post you link to, agrees with me.) | |
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to wifi4milez
said by wifi4milez :I have bad news for you. If you have opened the page and then checked the "view source" option, then you have already loaded the Google code! All that enables you to do is check after the fact if Google had code embedded in the page. Furthermore, assuming you can find the Google specific code, what will you do then? All I get is this:
Wonder what gets activated in that?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
