Slashdot Log In
IE8 Will Contain an Accidental Ad Blocker
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Aug 26, 2008 01:39 AM
from the inprivate-blocking dept.
from the inprivate-blocking dept.
JagsLive sends in a Washington Post blog post reflecting on one privacy-enhancing feature of the upcoming Internet Explorer 8, the so-called "InPrivate Blocking" that has privacy advocates quietly cheering, and advertisers seriously worrying. Here is Microsoft's description of the feature. From the Post: "The advertising industry is bracing for trouble from the next version of Microsoft's Internet Explorer, details of which were announced today, because it will offer a feature that blocks some ads and other content from third-parties that shows up on Web pages. A Microsoft spokesman said that the feature, to be known as 'InPrivate Blocking,' was never designed to be an ad blocker, though 'there may be ads that get blocked.' Instead, it was designed to stop tracking 'pixels' or pieces of code that could allow third-party sites to track users as they move around the Web."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
They just don't get it do they (Score:4, Informative)
The two are one and the same.
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
words?
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's more a case of your humor not having any sense of moderation.
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it just me or does this Karma Train not make any sense?
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Is it just me or does this Karma Train not make any sense?
Yes.
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
damn mods with no sense of humour
Well, that's a redundant statement too!
Parent
Re:I know! I know! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Interesting)
Doesn't it read a bit more like they're trying to block google analytics? Not that they're taking a direct shot at any particular company of course... maybe I'm just overly paranoid.
I don't think so. Google Analytics tracks many visitors to the same site, whereas this seems to be aimed at preventing tracking of the same visitor to many sites. In the MS blog it says it'll prevent the same cookie tracking you across more than 10 sites. I think the implication is that it's bad for Adsense, Doubleclick and the like as they can no longer track you through third-party cookies on dozens of sites and build up an advertising profile of you that way.
Good for privacy of course, but as so much of the web is ad-funded is this really going to be good for the web as a whole ? I guess we'll have to wait and see on that one.
I think it's interesting also that this is happening as Microsoft tries to become a bigger player in the internet ad business. They could use IE feature to their advantage here, as it'd be fairly easy for them to implement a scheme where all third-party cookies are limited, except for those of Microsoft and its "selected partners". Would we put it past them to do something along those lines ?
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes. Less advertisement means less people wanting to tell you how to do stuff. It also means less sites that are only there to advertise (like TV is there only to sell soap).
Instead of the product the sites sells to their customers, the advertisers, the public will become the customer again. It could mean the end of a gazillion sites that basically copy and paste each other information. Instead of quantity, it would mean quality.
I and all people using some sort of ad-blocking would love to have less advertisement. And I guess plenty of those who don't use them won't be upset if there were less advertisements.
Are people so much into corporate speech that they think they can not exist except if some company is sponsoring them? Yes, there are exceptions.
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Informative)
If by header, you mean , it's probably because that's where Javascript should be kept. All my webpages validate as xhtml strict, and placing the tag in is the only way for it to validate.
Wrong! The script element can be placed within either the head or body of a page, so placing it near the end is perfectly fine.
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but you're incorrect [w3.org]. The applicable block of valid XHTML, with the Google Analytics code where Google advises to put it:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
//<![CDATA[
//]]>
//<![CDATA[
//]]>
[snip]
<script type="text/javascript">
var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www.");
document.write("\<script src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'>\<\/script>" );
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-3044339-1");
pageTracker._initData();
pageTracker._trackPageview();
</script>
</body>
Posting anonymously, because I don't want to waste the moderation points that I've already applied to this thread.
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah I am aware of those, however, the OP, as well as myself seem to prefer Opera, and dont deem this as worthy of switching browsers entirely. If he had said "In Firefox" then I would have suggested those...
However, Opera is capable of the same thing, disable JavaScript (or Java entirely if you want) then enable it on a per-site basis, even so far as allowing or disabling specific content/scripts within a certain page via Opera's built in stuff, or using custom (or ones people have made) CSS and JS's, etc etc...
The easiest is usually just using the "Block Content" (per-site basis on the context menu, different from 'Blocked Content' main settings) option, where it dims the stuff that can't be blocked, then you just click on anything you want to block.
Plus, there is various plugins and widgets that can do the same, or different (albeit a much smaller userbase/community than Firefox)
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the opposite... If IE8 had some really good anti-advertising stuff then I would be REALLY happy.
I am not against advertising, but I am against adverts that:
1) Suck up 50% of my CPU.
2) Make noise even though I don't want them to.
3) Decide to every now and then pop over my reading or viewing area.
I do click on adverts, and still want adverts, but I want adverts to behave like newspaper adverts!
Parent
Re:They just don't get it do they (Score:5, Interesting)
You mean like those Dice ads that Slashdot was displaying forever even though I emailed them repeatedly and told them it was crashing my browser and slowing down my computer?
Parent
Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody that really wants ad blocking can do it now. Most of the people that do want it don't use IE.
All that this changes is control of the ads that are shown in IE. Instead of some 3rd party ad, you will get an ad that is 'blessed' by microsoft (after the advertiser pays a fee to M$).
From Microsoft's decription:
"Have you ever wanted to take your web browsing "off the record"? Perhaps you're using someone else's computer and you don't want them to know which sites you visited. Maybe you need to buy a gift for a loved one without ruining the surprise. Maybe you're at an Internet kiosk and don't want the next person using it to know at which website you bank."
IE8 is supposed to solve all of that? Bullshit.
Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid?
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft thinks that using an Internet kiosk for banking is OK? Are they really that out of touch?
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually no. I know plenty of non-computer people who I off hand mentioned ad blocking to. Generally the reaction is a stunned look followed by "you can do that?" and begging me to set it up for them. Most people don't even know it exists.
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:5, Funny)
You can do that!?... with a browser?
And all this time I've been blocking ads to all the machines on my network with a squid proxy... oh wait
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's true. The trick is don't be talking about security, or start talking about security. Or simply recommend ad blocking out of the blue. Keep it off-handed. The classic geek "blah-blah-Lassie-blah-blah" just spooks them. They're happy to learn ads can be blocked. Say "heck yeah" and simply show them how, end of explanation. Continue to build trust like that and they /might/ be able to handle security advice from you after two years.
But you know, don't. I don't want ad blocking to be commonplace. That'll just cause ads that are harder to block for the rest of us, and it'll make it much less likely that the greater populace will become suprised and outraged enough about uncontrolled user-tracking to demand legislation. And finally start to wonder about the lack of relevant privacy legislation for the modern world in general.
The BT debacle is kinda the start of that. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7438578.stm [bbc.co.uk]
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, we can all do this ourselves either with the appropriate browser software and settings or at a network level. But don't you see? If Microsoft are billing this as a feature for the next IE, then it means this sort of stuff is reaching mainstream consciousness. And it's about bloody time. Good for M$, for once!
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Who the hell is drinking this cool-aid? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not a great analogy, MS; you should mention that tracking cookies never ask permission.
Parent
Firefox Anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Firefox Anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
I think you mean Adblock Plus... Adblock hasn't really been updated for about 4 years
I've found all I need is Adblock Plus with a subscription to "EasyElement+EasyList"
Parent
Re:Firefox Anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's what I thought also: in other words, IE will provide part of the functionality of NoScript and AdBlockPlus, starting from version 8.
Of course, they couldn't market it as such: it would be harder to plaster "innovation" all over it.
Marketing spin aside, this is good news: since most people still use IE, it's good that this should increase the privacy level for everyone (if implemented right, that is).
Parent
FYI (heads up) Privoxy (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.privoxy.org/ [privoxy.org]
Re:FYI (heads up) Privoxy (Score:4, Interesting)
I think this is the first time I've seen someone mention privoxy among the dozens of adblock posts.
I run privoxy on a separate machine so that it's available to every computer on my network, thereby minimising the need for installing Firefox extras. And while I'd recommend it highly (definitely a plus for over-burdened laptops when it's running elsewhere), it doesn't seem to the same job as adblock when it comes to an ad-free webpage. The Slashdot site, for example, renders with the right column being pushed down quite a distance leaving a gaping whitespace. It can be a tough choice sometimes: soul-sucking advertising, or existential emptiness.
Parent
who do advertisers think they are? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:who do advertisers think they are? (Score:4, Insightful)
From the perspective of companies, they consider that your eyeballs on their ads is a fair trade for giving you access to their content. If they provided you with an opt-in model for advertising, we agree, their revenue stream would collapse and they'd cry. Then their content would disappear, and you (average population) would cry.
It's silly to expect them to give you content and get nothing in return. If your view was purely principled, you wouldn't go to their sites, and then you don't have to worry about it.
Parent
Google anylitics killer! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Google anylitics killer! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Google anylitics killer! (Score:5, Funny)
I block google analytics because I see no difference between their spying on me and any other advertiser spying on me. Seriously, how did we get to the point where everyone thinks its A-OK for google to spy, but no other advertiser?
That point came the moment you joined Slashdot. Evil's motto is "Don't be Google," you know.
Parent
Really smart browser (Score:5, Funny)
I see a lot of MS bashing already (Score:4, Insightful)
But when you read an article about it, it seems perfectly reasonably stuff; 'sandbox' your session against cookie- and form-storage, block annoying trackers - all part of the standard browser ! There's no pretense of 'total security and/or anonymity' here, people, so stop whining.
damned if they do, damned if they don't... (Score:4, Interesting)
I can barely contain the mixed feelings I have over this issue and some of the juvenile responses. Right now I more annoyed with the Linux/Open Source/EFF advocates that can't give a simple acknowledgment to a step forward of the end-users' protection and privacy IE8 may.
One thing I can say before going back to replaying Halo 2 on my now decommissioned Beowulf cluster is, "Good job Microsoft for trying to protect 75+% of the worlds Internet users".
I am personally grateful that the users of our 1000+ Linux, Solaris, BSD server farm are better protected.
Let's remember there is no such thing as a free lunch. Some where, some how, the bill must be paid. Until socialism or communism govern the Internet some level of commercial advertising will need to be tolerated in order to pay the bill in order to keep the "lights and water" running.
--magus
(not to be confused with magu$)
That's not really a surprise is it? (Score:5, Funny)
Why the bashing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Not everyone wishes to pointblank block adverts but few people want the shady and legally quesitonable tracking techniques some ads used gathering their details, especially those that get around strict cookie rules/settings.
However I find it amusing that people still find ways to bash Microsoft over this. It's a sensible privacy feature. If you want to block ads completely, fine, we all know that firefox can do that amazingly (at least until it's widespread enough for ad providers to start making their clients use an impossible to block local caching system) but this a smart feature for those who don't wish to block ads completely.
Not Ad Blocking, Tracking Blocking... (Score:5, Insightful)
There is difference between ad blocking and tracking blocking.
This identifies 3rd party code that keeps track of users browsing habits, and allows the user to reject being tracked.
Google would be hurt by this, as Google is NOT just about displaying ads, but displaying 'contextual' ads that it gets from not only the site content but the user viewing the site, based on the user's browsing history stored at Google.
Check out the Channel9 interview for more information and the intent of this.
http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Charles/IE-8-Beta-2-Privacy-is-about-more-than-cookies/ [msdn.com]
It would be 'easy' to paint MS as being evil, but in reality, this is a feature that 'exposes' the evil that exists all over the web, from pixel tracking systems to full ad user tracking systems like Google uses.
If Google or other online advertisers wants to display Ads, and not be affected by this, then display Ads and STOP TRACKING USERS along with the Ads.
It doesn't block "ads." It blocks snooping. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bravo for Microsoft! The feature doesn't affect honest advertising at all.
Anyone who wants to put up a straightforward ad, presenting information about a product and letting me decide whether I'm interesting in learning more and buying it, can still do so.
This only affects companies who are doing more than just advertising.
The fact that this is being described as an "ad" blocker just shows that advertising practices on the Web have become so debased that writers about the Web simply take it for granted that anything under the guise of advertising is likely to be invested with snooper gadgets that gather information about us without our knowledge.
That's not advertising. That's spying. "Advertising" is just the cover story.
Marketers, eat shit and die (Score:5, Insightful)
"'It has the potential to undermine the economies of the Internet,' said Mike Zaneis, vice president of the Interactive Advertising Bureau."
Go kill yourself, you worthless festering sore on society's anus.
The advertising industry could have been responsible from the start, but they chose to incur a backlash of end users who got sick of sneaky tactics like popups and pop-unders. Advertisers who whine that end users no longer tolerate ads make me laugh.
Seriously, choke on your failure and die. You fuck.
I agree (Score:5, Funny)
It's almost as bad as going to the bathroom during commercials when you're watching tv!
Parent
Re:Adblockers = theft (Score:4, Insightful)
Ads are theft too, with all their flash, sound and graphics, it costs more to watch the ads than the content if you're on a pay per byte subscription.
So it's fair to place all kinds of heavy and annoying ads, if people are just free to block those that gets too expensive or annoying. Action equals reaction, it's up to the ad-funded to find a profitable business model, including a sensible advertising policy that does not encourage visitors to block. If visitors block your ads, your product was not worth paying for anyway.
Alright I do know that blockers like ABP simply blocks everything and I gotta admit that may be unfair, but on the other hand, the majority of ads online are excessive, so the ones i feel sorry for are the minority who actually have a sane advertising policy.
Parent