Hacker News Reader

Comment by clarkenheim | Hacker News Reader

The features in Safari only harms the smaller companies who's domain is not in the visited sites list. the behemoths like Google who always have a first party cookie dont have a problem with the feature and therefore get even more control over online advertising.

View on HN

This attitude is exactly what makes the ad networks money. You really think thise small sites will continue without a sustainable source of real, verifiable revenue?

People who make content worth something to me should get that money honestly, not baiting me onto the site to get ad revenue and subtly lowering my quality of living and happiness.

Nobody deserves ad revenue.

The consolidation of online advertising is a real problem, but I don't think Apple should be making product decisions to preserve competition in the ad market. Preserving competition is literally the job of antitrust regulators and that is the avenue to address concentration in markets. Fortunately they seem to be waking up to this.

I agree that it harms smaller companies (though some are not that small), but I see this as a big step in the right direction. I think the big players can only be stopped by legal means anyway.

I agree this is definitely a step in the right direction. At very least it (hopefully) makes the public at large aware of the issue.

Not if people install a content blocker in Safari. Especially since the same blockers also work in the newer WKWebView that's embedded into apps.

Highly recommend installing Firefox focus. It will integrate its blockers into safari.

Nitpick: The blockers work in SFSafariBrowserViewController, but they're not installed in WKWebView (you can of course install your own blockers into your WKWebView, but you don't get the ones from the app store; this makes sense because otherwise there's too much potential for screwing with webviews that show content curated by the containing app).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com