blocking ads is evil grr
HTTP is a pull-based medium. it is within the original philosophy of HTTP to selectively pull the data, for example, a device that doesn't support images won't download them. by circumventing ad "blocking", you are spitting in the face of HTTP. a more accurate term would be ad rejection. ads are not "blocked", they are simply not asked for.
@lynnesbian Which is why Google and pals were pushing (pun intended) HTTP 2.0. Also why they’re pushing for obfuscated/binary formats. We’re already seeing CDNs bake in content and ads and proxy tracking via first-party calls etc., to circumvent blocking. In extension-based blockers that can run arbitrary JavaScript, what we have is literally a JavaScript battle in your browser as the blocker and anti-blocking scripts go at it in a game of cat of mouse. Adtech is malware.
@dshafik @aral @lynnesbian I think it's popular here to hate Google, justified or not.
A lot of the tech enables soooo many cool things but "nooo they just want to push ads on you". Ffs people, there's a guy running a free photoshop in a browser. Web and web getting capabilities is a _good_ thing for us all!
@dshafik no it isn't. But they're the ones who push the most with a lot of these things, including http/2. Also, google might be easy to hate. But that's 85 thousand people! You can't hate them all, some of these people are amazing, a lot of them are awesome and most of them are just cool. (Not you, people in general).
@zladuric @dshafik @aral @lynnesbian
#Ads are the least annoying issue with #Google.
https://medium.com/@giacomo_59737/the-web-is-still-a-darpa-weapon-31e3c3b032b8
As for HTTP/2, it's not a #Google thing, but Google is who gains a comparative competitive advantage by its introduction and implementation complexity.
We should always remember that each increment in complexity strengthen the position of the biggest players and often half-addresses the problem they created.
@zladuric I'm not a fan of Google, but HTTP/2 isn't google either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯