Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox
From: monikerd <monikerd () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:33:41 +0200
You know this is all old crap and a load of smoke bowing up usb ports. The entire point of the advertising industry is that they will try to put adds everywhere all over the place. And it's you're job to be a smart enough person to avoid them, and buy what you want. The only reason we are seeing this flair up, is because we won a battle, and we are eating a few less adds for a while. Technology will evolve, and they will find new ways to serve us up stuff we don't really want. This is just as insane, if all spyware/adware software companies complained against a secure operating system, that their software doesn't work there. Or spam hubs ignoring people with filters. You have to look at some webpages. it's add's all over the place. Websites I like, i will follow the links from time to time. (not just load the page in the background) Generating more revenue, than when i would be annoyed with flashy banners all day. Not to mention all the porn adverticements, that just don't belong on the screen at all times. The busyness model for some websites may need to be changed once again. Because frankly they made no sence. Only in an crappy IE6 monopoly. Where neighbours _litterally rang my bell asking me to close all those popups with nude people before the wife got home_ It was crazy, now technology evolved, and the busyness models will have to follow suit. using all the things like promo codes, embeded add's in the video streams, and all those fancy things. I will always be at war with the people that want to force me to view other things than I want. You crazy people can not force me what to see You crazy people can not force me which browser and hence operating system I have to use Computers aren't add delivery machines. How about we consumers grab control of our lives control the computers. before corporations think they can control us. You know the idea that add block is evil, is so crazy that you have some people believing in it just for the sake of it. You know what. Let's follow google on this one. If there is one company that trives on online advertisements it's those guys. From the moment that they block Firefox because of addblock. I'll follow suit. I will probably speak for a few people when I say: If I can't visit your website with whatever browser i _CHOOSE_ I do not need you're site. this is nothing but pushing another agenda. Suck it up, you douchbacks, you lost a battle, prepare for the next or die out like the dinosaurs. Tremaine Lea wrote:
On 11-Sep-07, at 1:12 PM, Juergen Fiedler wrote:On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:58:24AM -0400, mbs wrote: [...]I don't know about anyone else, but I happen to pay for my internet access. If I choose not to waste my bandwidth (and my time) with unwanted content, I would suggest that is my right.This is not going to be a very popular opinion, but I submit that the only honest way to exercise this right is to stay away from sites that serve content that you don't want to see.How will a user know what content, precisely, is on the site without visiting it? You seem to be proposing that we should blindly trust the other side until proven otherwise rather than proactively protecting the system.By serving ads on a site, the owner implicitly demands viewing them as a form of payment for the content they provide. While I think that blocking all Firefox users from a site makes very litle sense, I can entirely disagree with the conclusion that blocking ads from ad supported sites is uncomfortably close to theft.Just my two cents... -JuergenThese sites would be better off finding a way to ensure the advertising content has loaded before the site content is provided then. As someone who administers perimeter security for a large enterprise, I could care less what these sites *think* they are entitled to push on users. If their content (or advertising) matches our filters, it gets blocked. Besides, taking action based on information provided by the client side has been considered a less than intelligent practice for some time ;) Cheers, --- Tremaine Lea Network Security Consultant Intrepid ACL "Paranoia for hire"
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox, (continued)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox James Matthews (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox James Matthews (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox Paul Schmehl (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox Randal, Phil (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox y0himba (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox mbs (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox Simon Smith (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox Juergen Fiedler (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox blah (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox Tremaine Lea (Sep 11)
- Re: Unreal: a movement to block Firefox monikerd (Sep 11)
