Get rid of adverts on webpages with fuss

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

This host file has enteries for most of the common web advert providers and overrides their address with a dummy IP so that most web adverts won't be displayed or downloaded evera gain =D

So it lets you take advantage of other people's hard work in creating and updating their websites, without giving them anything back as a thank-you or payment for that hard work. For the piddling disadvantage of having to view a few ads, you get access to free website content - and you're too lazy to even go to the miniscule trouble of having to view those ads.

And I'm sure it will come as an amazing surprise to you when those websites close down due to their being no point in the webmaster keeping them up.

The level of stupidity involved in thinking that this is a good thing boggles the mind.

I guess you stay up all night watching infomercials, too?

What do infomercials have to do with websites that pay their way by showing ads?

If you visit a site that has content that you find useful; do you consider removing the ads that make it worthwhile for the site owner to provide that content, as a suitable way of thanking them for their efforts? I run a few ad-supported sites myself, and personally I consider this sort of thing a slap in the face.

Thanks a lot! This will come in handy.

If adverts weren't sometimes invasive, such as taking over the whole screen until I find the stupid X button, or making stupid noises, maybe I wouldn't mind so much. And sometimes I've had websites freeze loading because the browser is waiting for info from the ad sites. I never click on adverts anyway.

Thanks Czar!!!

Sorry Bill, but most of the companies also allow spyware ads. Plus, no one should depend on making money from online ads. Get a job if you want money.

Here is another tip for your online experience: http://www.opendns.com/


Jason

Seriously, even on an internet crammed with stupidity, this stands out.

Please type up a list of all of the "acceptable" jobs on the planet so the rest of us can consult it before attempting to earn any money. Also, be sure to host the list on your server so we can use your bandwidth to download it at no cost to ourselves.

SpaceAce

I agree with both sides of this, blocking ads on sites is wrong as its paying for the site. In the long run, as bill says the webmaster will probably close it down as a no-gainer. There is nothing wrong whatsoever with non invasive ads and sponsored links etc.
These can keep a free site / software business running, fair and square.

However, i strongly protest at having "invasive" adverts, the kind that cost YOU money in time. I'm talking about ones that cover areas of content until a very subtle "closer" is clicked, multiple pop-ups, ones that make noises and those that contain spyware/security alerts. Websites that host -these- kind of ads DESERVE to be abused, shutdown and make no money as the world is probably better of without them anyway.

I hate those ads, as well, and will be glad if they disappear from the internet. However, this:



is a bunch of garbage. There is a HUGE difference between advertising and spyware/hijacking. No matter how annoying a full-page ad is, it is not justification for "abuse" of the site. That website is providing something you want, otherwise you wouldn't be pissed off about the "subtle closer", you'd just close the page and move on. If that site provides something you want, you should either pay the price they ask (look at their ads) or go find your information elsewhere. There is not some legal loophole that allows you to exchange inconvenience for goods. If Best Buy is annoying me with loud Muzak (and in-store ads, while we're at it), I don't get to grab an LCD television off the shelf on my way out.

Look at the link in the original post. They block Google AdSense and Overture. How many trojans/keyloggers/hijackers have AdSense and Overture ever installed on your computer? The answer is, "none." Someone who uses AdSense on his site might also try to get you to download spyware, but that has nothing to do with AdSense or Overture. Blocking legitimate revenue sites does NOTHING to hurt spyware distributors, because the spyware is not hosted on the AdSense servers.

SpaceAce

It is the exact same thing you are describing. Besides selling advertising during shows, TV stations sell "show length" blocks of advertising in order to gain revenue to provide the "free" access to the normal programming on their channel. Unless you sit up all night and watch the infomercials that pay for the free programming you enjoy, you are literally doing the same thing you are getting mad at Czar for. At the very least you are a hypocrite.

We won't get into whether you read every ad in a magazine or newspaper. Afterall, these ads enable the publisher to sell you the magazine/paper at an affordable price. So you must read every one of these ads, too.

I wasn't so-much talking about those, i mean the ones that force you to click on a control (eg. if you click 'X' it comes back, or the ones that "follows" you and you have to spend ages scanning it to find the "closeme" which is often tiny and not immediately obvious).
..and by abuse, i mean blocking the ads which is what this thread is about. I wasnt talking DDoS attacks or anything :D

Whether you think it is morally right or wrong (you can make a case for that) as far as I know it isn't illegal or technically stealing to block the adverts in any way. From a personal perspective, I NEVER get anything from ads anyway and if I wanted to buy something, I'd do my own research about it first. The adverts don't make the sites money by simply being loaded in my browser, I have to click them, so me personally blocking the ads isn't taking away any of their revenue. Although, you could argue by helping to spread knowledge of this other people who do use ads will be cut off from providing revenue.

I trust you browse with your pop-up blocker disabled btw?

Maybe I will decide to reenable ads, nonetheless.

I have used this hosts file trick for years now.
If it's called stealing, then I'm gladly a criminal.
The most valuable asset these days is time. If ads use my time, they become an expense. Google ads are subtle enough so they can be disregarded, but most of the crap out there is either
- in the way
- distracting
- downright abusive on internet usability

If ads went back to the days of just being a static image with a link anchored in, and not involving some form of animated GIF, javascript, flash, or some means of cookie-tracking or a trojan/virii exploit embedded in, I'd be glad not to use an ad-blocker. But unfortunately these days, if you want to prevent that from happening, you pretty much have to block them all. The only one I can trust is just Google adsense since they apparently have half a brain on the subject matter.

This gets rid of more than adverts, it stops some very dodgy sites from loading that use mock tests to that scare unaware users that their PC is infected with a virus or faulty, into buying some crap scamware.

I am with Czar. I make very good use of my hosts file. I block all ads and Opera makes it very easy to block ads that other methods might miss.

I often will avoid sites of indie developers if they use ads, especially dodgy services like google and their various tracking schemes. I also do not watch commercials when watching TV, I flip the channel when a commercial comes on the radio, and I do not read ads in magazines or newspapers and I am routinely hostile to telemarketers and I throw away all ads I get via snail mail.

Good point, although unfortunately the kind of people who will fall for those scrams are also the kind who are unlikely to use this kind of trick :(

If you know enough to load in this hosts file, one assumes that you know enough not to click on fake anti-malware software advertisements in the first place.

My argument falls flat on its face in the case of a shared computer, of course ;)

This topic is very interesting. On the grounds that I had almost forgotten about ads on the Internet.

Ok my opinion is simple. Ads on websites are just spam, except they don't pop into your inbox. It's that simple.

If I want something I will buy it. I object to sales people or Jehovas witnesses coming to my door so I certainly object to it on the Internet, I have never bought something from an advert, I have the willpower and free thinking ability to choose what I like to buy or use and in effect I will probably not buy something on purpose if an ad has annoyed me.

I am never going to buy from spam adverts. The difference of course is that spam in your inbox can never be fully blocked but ads on the Internet can.

Firefox's combination of NoScript, AdBlock and FlashBlocker has given me almost 3 years of adless web browsing and boy do I enjoy it. Even when ads used to load, I just ignored them. My eyes got used to not seeing them, just like in newspapers and other 'unblockable' mediums of life. At least if I block them I am saving bandwidth as well. Which surely benefits other people.

I pay for my website using my own money, why should I force people to look at crap which isn't associated with me? Browsing should be free.

i rarely channel hopped during advert breaks on TV, unless i was on a freeview music station and switched to the other.
i saw adverts on itv and channel 4/5 as toilet breaks
sure during a movie its annoying that they cut into the film and sometimes cut up the same flick, but in the cinema id be glad for a break some times, somethjing i left till the end of the movie (unless it was really dull) but it spoilt the ejoyment of the final chase/fight scenes if i was fidgeting in my seat thinking i could refill my coke
simple solution, dont drink in the cinema

cinema adverts you dont have to be in in time and can skip even the trailers, ive been in enough sub 10 person screenings (once including just myself the usher and the projectionist) to know that they make most of their money on the consessions stand, if they did it like easy jet, the film wouldnt start till 75% or more of the seats were sold

websites with adverts, i dont bother reading them (the adverts that is) the same as i skip the full page ads in magazines, its true that without adverts most mags would be more expencive, but when you take out all the adverts most magazines slim down considerably

if a game programmer offered you a choice
free games with adverts on the website (that were un obtrusive and didnt require clicking)
games that cost with no adverts
and everyone voted adverts, yet blocked them and s/he found no money coming in to pay for hosting, dont be too surprised if the game you loved vanished from the net or ends up with a price tag

I've always seen it as a way of making a cheap buck on the internet. It doesn't bother me, as you can block them out. It's no different than using a spam filter on your inbox.

I'm actually surprised advertisers make any money what so ever from these types of things. In a way, adverts and spam probably suck most of the speed from the internet and stop you getting better speeds (which i might add, your PAYING for) so even more reason for you to block them. The sooner they bugger off, and spam mail disappears, the most internet bandwidth you get back.

Would it be a ridiculas thing to suggest that you end up paying more because of spammers? Think about it. Your on say 4 meg broadband, yet your maybe only getting 2 meg tops (on fibre optic suppliers), paying a decent price. Spammer and choking up the internet forcing the overall speeds down. And they send these mails for >>FREE<<. You want faster broadband. So you pay more for the higher 8 meg broadband, just so you might get closer to the 4 you paid for in the first place.

Therefore, spammers are costing you money.

I agree 100%. It is sad that people actually support and defend such schemes. If nothing else is shows a complete lack of respect for your customers.

Try telling that to Facebook or telling ITV not to show adverts. At the end of the day, time is money and if you expect people to write content for you, you either have to buy it or accept the advertising that comes with it because professional people also have to pay for their food and rent.

and something has to pay for the hosting of the website/file you want, more so if they give it away free

like i said, none of the advertizing sites i visit require me to click/watch/interact with the adverts in order to get to the article or whatever ive gone to the site for
yes on a mobile broadband package i dont want to pay to download something i dont want, but its not as if im being sent 30 second video clips clocking in at oodles of mb, if i was id stop it or stop going

and some of these banner adverts are only slightly bigger than gameboys image sig (ok most are larger)

ITV and other UK tv/radio stations NEED advertising income in order to supply you with content, the bbc is advert free cos we pay the licence fee, infact without 'boiling a kettle' i dont think any other country has an advert free tv station comparable to bbc
and i doubt the cast of friends would have gotten their $1mil an episode pay cheque if it wasnt for advert money, the bbc sure wouldnt pay an actor THAT amount per episode no matter how popular

if you want it free or subsidised your going to have to accept some adverts
im just glad we dont have to watch a 30 second clip inbetween links, then i'll REALLY complain

not that ive watched it
just cos corrie is (or was i dont know) sponsored by cadburys didnt mean every 3rd word woulc be curly wurly milk chocolate buttons arnt nestle c**p? although i think it WOULD spice up the script somewhat

edit:
and f1 racing, no adverts, no sponsorships, no nothing
and lewis hamiltons grey car just passed the red car of (someone who drives a red car)
yes in real life the team gets a meantion but sorry saying mercedes and ferrari are also deemed advertising or product placement at least and i never took up smoking due to the marlboro logo being slapped on ferraris nor when the john player special car used to knock around, but those great big logos helped pay for the race i was watching 'for free' on the bbc (befor itv paid more money to do so)

the worst kind of advertising?
peopel who are willing to spend more on a top cos it says fcuk lonsdale rockport or whatever on the chest (says he wearing a jack daniels logo tshirt least it cost the same as another tshirt on the next rack)

You neglected to mention one big difference. A Jehovas witness comes to your door unasked, while you are voluntarily going to a website.

Ah yes in F1, the cars have adverts on them, however they have so many that it simply becomes a pattern. I can't recall any logos off the top of my head. Has the advertising sponsors failed because of this? I can handle a 2 second mention of the sponsor. Infact this is a good way of sponsoring I feel, it doesn't stop the action for more than a moment. Either way though, still doesn't make me want to eat chocolate.

> You neglected to mention one big difference.
> A Jehovas witness comes to your door unasked,
> while you are voluntarily going to a website.

Not true. They are the same. Do one thing and get pestered to do/think about another.

I go on the Internet to look at things, and get pestered with things I don't want to see/read.

I sit in my house relaxing and get pestered by people about things I don't want to hear/talk about.

Both are involuntary and both are annoying.

Alternatively the best way to get rid of Jehovas witness's is to invite them in, be nice and ask them difficult questions about the loopholes in religious faith that they can't answer. Eventually they want to leave and thus never come back to your house.

Or say you give blood?

Im not sure if you were talking to me there, but no i dont. Most of those are JS controlled floating DIVs so pop-up blockers would not help anyway.

if they offered free bus services and the only catch was id have to listen to non stop adverts (even audiable with my headphones on) id do it, i just hope that theyd have more adverts than radio seems to have, i swear some adverts get more airplay per hour than songs

actually radio based infomercials would probably be better on some of the longer routs, the driver would probably go potty though

Wouldn't it be great if EVERYTHING in life was free, as it was ad-funded? Everywhere you went, ads. You wake up, ads. You go to the toilet, ads. You get married, ads. You're in hospital dying, ads. Shoot me now.

that might be taking it too far ;)
although "this suicide was brought to you by smith and western" :D

but they fail all the time trying to get people out of their cars and onto buses to reduce congestion and each side as pros and cons

pro cars go where you want when you want
cod to take a bus i have to wait for it to show up and it might be once in a blue moon
con rural services are like rural post offices, nigh on non existant

busses wont increase in service without extra passengers and car drivers wont go onto busses till they are more frequent and service routes they need