News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google inte... by sgustard on Monday September 24, 2018 @02:10AM (#18055405)
I don't "know" as a viewer how ad-based business models work. In fact I generally assume that ads have to be clicked on to make money. Since I haven't clicked on an ad in years, does that make me a freeloader? I'll assume that once eye-tracking is commonplace then publishers will get paid only when viewers look at their ads. If I avert my eyes, am I stealing? On the other hand: why can't an ad-blocker plugin still trigger a payment for the ad view, while preventing me from seeing it?
Re:Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google inte... by Reelin on Monday September 24, 2018 @03:44AM (#18055759)
> why can't an ad-blocker plugin still trigger a payment for the ad view, while preventing me from seeing it?

The ad-blocker won't load the ad at all for two reasons. 1) Performance. Less to load (and process, and render, etc) means faster load times, less bandwidth consumption, lower CPU usage (think about all those extra scripts), etc. 2) Privacy. If your computer contacts the ad network at all, then it could track you.

Because the blocker fundamentally can't load the ad or contact the respective network while also doing its job, triggering a payment would seem to be more or less impossible.

Re:Modifications to Google Chromium for removing Google inte... by poooogles on Monday September 24, 2018 @03:44AM (#18055750)
>In fact I generally assume that ads have to be clicked on to make money.

Not at all. Most of the industry moved away from CPC a while ago due to how dodgy it skews data. Most clicks end up being bots on shady websites Vs actual people. Viewabilty is what the good agencies are advertising against now; with the hope that you'll navigate to the advertiser's site down the line.