Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking Arms Race

Re:Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking ... by jaredklewis on Friday April 14, 2017 @11:26PM (#14119198)

Why not? Even if the risk of getting caught is small, if the penalties are large, the risk isn't worth it. Feel like risking a trip to jail just to avoid some ads?

Not to mention that it is fairly easy for government to clamp down on distribution of software that allows ad blocking.

As blockers will still exist, but adoption will plummet if the only place to get a ad blocker is torrent sites and such.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking ... by bigbugbag on Monday April 17, 2017 @08:45PM (#14135670)

Thing is an ad-blocker is merely a content blocker that happens to block ads. making ad blocking illegal would not make content blocker illegal.

You could still use those to block trackers which are the underwater part of the online ads iceberg. Making an anti-tracking-blocking law would be a different beast because now you're attacking a fundamental human right to privacy and advertisers would still be mad because they lost their ability to upsell their ads that can't be targeted or retargeted anymore.

Alternatively just go back to using the system hosts file, or replace ad blockers by whole website blockers, use a vpn to a country that does not have this law. There are options around such a nonsense piece of legislation

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Princeton’s Ad-Blocker May Put an End to the Ad-Blocking ... by jpambrun on Sunday April 16, 2017 @02:05PM (#14126692)

You just can't jail everybody that avoid DRM or blocks ads. There would be nobody left to pay for said prisons.

[ Parent | on HN ]