Google is a frigging AD MONOPOLY ... its their major business for crying out loud. And the same company that controls a HUGE portion of all the Internet Ad business is creating an "Ad Blocker".
And this doesn't ring any bells anywhere?
No friend, they are not trying to put "ad blocker" companies out of business. They are trying to put "competing internet ad companies" out of business.
Bad ads ruin it for Google. They teach users to mentally block ALL ads. It's like people abusing antibiotics and building a resistance.
That might be why someone proposed it. But your parent comment mentions why management approved of the risky move:
> They are trying to put "competing internet ad companies" out of business.
So if - and that is a big if - Google goes ahead with this plan, they will have to make absolutely sure that any blocking is based on objective and simple to understand quality criteria.
And for the record, I don't think everyone at Google is evil, but I imagine a few managers are in it for the money and not merely the altruistic idea of making ads better.
On the contrary, it is completely obvious that Google has very little to gain from shaving a few percentage points off competitors and incur the risk of regulatory action.
The greatest danger they face is ad blockers and a general decline of the Web. If Google is in it for the money they must save the Web from death by advertising.
Ads that drive me on a different page, cover the full page unless closed or otherwise hamper navigation unless I interact with them first can die in a firey hell.
I've uBlock but youtube and other content creators sites that so far hasn't annoyed me with ads are free to go. I.e. Looking For Group started serving to mobile page redirecting ads, so they went in the blacklist, but until then they were free to serve whatever.
You walking down the street having a guy handing out leaflets, trying to force his leaflet on you... You're most likely to get annoyed by them.
There is a little stand at the corner having leaflets, without anyone yelling in your face or handing it out, you're more likely to go grab one if the product fits you.
Walking to work every morning I have created my real life AdBlock, where I just ignore people handing stuff. (Not their fault... just businesses not understanding how to change ways)
This.
Internet is creating massive monopolies that are gathering an immense power that allow them to kill any other company that tries to compete with them. It's starting to be scary...
If Marine le Pen wins on the other hand...
Perhaps electing Le Pen might actually do some good to it by forcing others to change?
A democratic political union must be based on stronger foundations than just having a couple of sister parties sharing the power in turns.
I look forward to seeing what happens to any businesses that get too greedy and disregard what happens when the pendulum swings left again.
I wonder what would be happening now if we had a wave of left-wing populists taking office instead.
Google already has what, 90% marketshare? They don't need to put their competitors out of business and would gain very little from doing so (their real competition is probably Facebook and they're fundamentally much harder to apply an adblocker to, since they control both the content and the advertising). Google do need to stop the existential threat to the whole industry that adblockers represent.
In the end, it is probably true that the competition is not really an issue, but Google need not "stop the existential threat to the whole industry that adblockers represent", because if it lets too many ads pass people will simply get back to the old third party adblockers.
A concrete example: Chrome is in a position to block those who use canvas/webgl fingerprinting for user tracking, and Google's ad business can avoid being blocked by not doing that.
Which will take years and the fine will be a pitance of the profit. Microsoft got away with anti-competitive behavior several times in the past and they came out better than before. Google can use the time to try to kill of any competition before anyone will stop it, get a slap on the wrist and it will be back to business as usual.
Firefox is overwhelmingly dependent on Yahoo for income, and Yahoo is an ad company.
Overall I feel that Firefox is sufficiently customisable, that it's probably the easiest browser to protect your privacy in and control content. I like Safari, but customisation is harder to do.
Don't let the door hit you on the way out, scummy ad companies.
In my mind they're the "I can't afford Adsense" ad company, their website interface feeds into that too.
Also, the pricing system seems quite nice, a continuous second-price auction.
It all seems very "fair".
Also it is easier to block google ads with 3rd party. Since ridiculous ads will be blocked natively, performance will be better I think.
Any technical reason why they couldn't?