Google Chrome: dal 15 febbraio pronta a bloccare i banner pubblicitari. Ecco le novità

[El Tazar]

Originariamente inviato da emiliano84

bene... speriamo...



quoto

Assolutamente!

[El Tazar]

Originariamente inviato da calabar

Io mi chiedo... ma un'informazione di questo tipo non dovrebbe essere messa ben in evidenza nell'articolo?
E magari poi approfondire per capire se ci siano dei meccanismi che impediscano a Google di fare comunque quel che vuole.

Nella lista vedo nomi come Facebook e Microsoft, mi piacerebbe vederci anche Mozilla che, per lo meno, non sarebbe interessata direttamente ai guadagni derivanti dagli ads ma solo all'esperienza utente.

E poi come fai a far sviluppare un battibecco nei commenti?
Messo così invece sembra che Google abbia fatto tutti da sola e i click aumentano

[lugligino]

Esiste una estensione indipendente che usi i criteri Better Ads?

[lugligino]

Ecco il commento di mozilla ...

With 40% of US internet users saying they have recently used ad blockers, people clearly have an intuitive understanding that trackers and ads can be annoying, but do ad blockers do what they want?

Many in the tech world have been looking into this. When the companies providing the ad blocker are also the world’s biggest advertising networks, will it truly give you the tools to be inconspicuously curious?

Google Chrome’s approach is focused on annoying ads. Its ad blocker blocks ads, but it does nothing against invisible trackers or tracking ads that comply with the standards of the Better Ads Coalition, in which Facebook and Google are key partners. Even Apple’s Intelligent Tracking Protection has a set of rules that favor trackers operated by sites that users visit at least once a day. Unsurprisingly, Google and Facebook are the sites most likely to fall into this category.

If you’re not using Firefox Quantum today and care about your privacy, I encourage you to give Firefox Quantum a try. With Tracking Protection turned on, you’ll get a web that lets you browse freely with fewer worries about pesky trackers, built by an independent organization that doesn’t run an ad network.

[gigisfan]

secondo voi a a che fare con questo l'improvvisa rimozione dallo store Chrome di Scriptblock?

[El Tazar]

Originariamente inviato da emiliano84

bene... speriamo...

quoto

Approfondendo tramite un analisi fatta da adblockplus si nota che in realtà in chrome Google ha "personalizzato" le linee guida...

Google has announced that it will follow the CBA’s definition for ad acceptability. From 55 types of ads, the CBA says that only nine of those ad types are egregious enough to block.

*It was not always clear where the CBA drew the line, so a few ad types tested were difficult to judge. This was especially true in two cases, both marked in the above spreadsheet with comments. We hope we were accurate in our interpretation. There weren’t many edge cases, though, so it doesn’t affect the big picture.

For example, the CBA says that the following ads and more are permissible:

Autoplay video ads (as long as they don’t automatically play sound)
Skippable prestitials
Ads that initiate up to 12 seconds of scroll lag to ensure you see them
Flashing ads
Side-rail takeover ads
You get the picture. Apparently, these new CBA standards bravely skim off the ads that may induce massive eye-gougings upon viewing.

In total, the new CBA-endorsed ad skimmer will only block 16.4 percent of the ad types listed in its white paper. In comparison, using the Acceptable Ads standard, Adblock Plus (and other ad blockers) block 51 different ad types, or 92.7 percent of those ads.

Qui un interssante e semplice confronto

Mah...

[fra55]

Originariamente inviato da El Tazar

Approfondendo tramite un analisi fatta da adblockplus si nota che in realtà in chrome Google ha "personalizzato" le linee guida...


Qui un interssante e semplice confronto

Mah...

Ottimo