Talk:Adblock Plus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Legality of Adblocking[edit]

is adblocking legal? it doesn't mention in he article. Twipley (talk) 01:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

well, i guess that's legal, since it's still alive. Twipley (talk) 05:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
It is very much legal In every jurisdiction I can think of. Blocking requests is any user's right and is simply good security. 74.197.27.85 (talk) 19:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
It's a very sad reflection of a commercialized society that you think doing something on your own computer to hide ads from yourself might somehow be criminal. It's up to you what you want to read and look at. I hope you don't feel guilty if you get up to use the toilet during a commercial break on television! Credulity (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:38, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course it is legal. It compares to taking a pair of siccors and cutting out ads from a newspaper. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.162.73.46 (talk) 08:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Acceptable Ads[edit]

This change goes against mozilla addons guidelines. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/docs/policies/reviews

     the features must adhere to the following requirements:
   * The add-on description must clearly state what changes the add-on makes.
   * All changes must be opt-in, meaning the user must take non-default action to enact the change.
   * The opt-in dialog must clearly state the name of the add-on requesting the change.
   * Uninstalling the add-on restores the user's original settings if they were changed.

This feature is opt-out(enabled by default) not opt-in(disabled by default) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.136.111.238 (talk) 15:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

You should consider the entire text instead of quoting something out of context. Here's the portion of the text that's missing:

 Whenever an add-on includes any unexpected feature that:
 * compromises user privacy or security (like sending data to third parties),
 * changes default settings like the homepage or search engine, or
 * changes settings or features in other add-ons or deactivates them altogether
 the features must adhere to the following requirements:
 ...

None of those points apply to Acceptable Ads. Greiner12 (talk) 01:54, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

AdBlock April fools 2012?[edit]

"Adblock now shows you cats instead of ads". This seems to be everywhere.--만두 (talk) 07:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

This was an April Fool joke by AdBlock and has therefore nothing to do with Adblock Plus (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdBlock#CatBlock). Greiner12 (talk) 01:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Google[edit]

Funding of Adblock Plus by Google in order to white list their ads seems noteworthy but not mentioned. 50.144.0.3 (talk) 21:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

See Also - Dec. 2013[edit]

Created a "See Also" subsection for the article, mirrored on the similar section in the AdBlock article, but with links to:

What other wikilinks do ppl think would be appropriate for inclusion in this see also section? Thanks. joepaT 06:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Ethics of Adblocking via BBC - Dec. 2013[edit]

BBC had an interesting article earlier this month on the ethics of adblocking and it's ripe for material that could be mined to improve this article. I'm sorry I dont'have the time to do it but wanted to bring it to your attention. Also wondering if the mention of controversy about acceptable ads program shouldn't be modified to note that controversy wasn't just on adblock plus forum + social media sites but was covered by MSM.

Blinking, beeping, auto-playing. Popping up, over, under. Tracking, intruding, unsettling. If the internet was a pretty face, advertising would be its wart.

Thankfully, if getting "a great six pack in weeks!" isn't your thing, you can simply flick a switch and use an adblocker - software that banishes the sight and hushes the din of irritating advertising all over the web.

The appeal is obvious, and millions have done it, but should you?

According to one count, 84% of the top 100 websites in the world rely on advertising to generate revenue...[1]

References

  1. ^ Lee, Dave (4 December 2013). ""Is it ethical to block adverts online?"". BBC News. Retrieved 20 December 2013. 

Hope the full article is useful. It mentions the Adblock Plus quite a few times. Cheers. joepaT 07:03, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Removal of information by ip[edit]

this ip edit removed some information claiming it's incorrect. I'm not sure whether it's vandalism or not. Sofia Koutsouveli (talk) 06:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Original Adblock was confused with AdBlock (a.k.a. BetaFish Adblocker)[edit]

The first paragraph contains the line "It is a fork of the original Adblock extension, developed by Michael McDonald, which is most recently had an update on March 11, 2015." However, the original Adblock extensions saw its last stable release in 2003 and was discontinued in 2007 (see repository history under http://www.mozdev.org/source/browse/adblock/).

The stated date (March 11, 2015) happens to be the same date when AdBlock (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdBlock) 2.19 was released which is why I assume that the author of this sentence confused those two separate extensions. Therefore I'd suggest that this sentence should be changed to "It is a fork of the original Adblock extension, developed by Michael McDonald, which has been discontinued." Greiner12 (talk) 02:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Adblock Plus buys AdBlock[edit]

It seems that Adblock Plus just bought AdBlock: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/02/adblock_flogged_off_to_mystery_buyer/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.29.251.163 (talk) 20:11, 4 October 2015 (UTC)


no one knows who bought adblock but there is not enough evidence--Jonnymoon96 (talk) 21:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Should version 0.9.9.0 be added to the about box for Microsoft Edge?[edit]

It's not the same for Internet Explorer. (I would add it if I could but I can't figure it out) Dre~ (talk) 06:31, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adblock Plus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:59, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Adware[edit]

I think Adblock Plus is adware with its "Acceptable Ads" that is use to make money.

"Adware, or advertising-supported software, is any software package that automatically renders advertisements in order to generate revenue for its author."

Should we not place Category:Adware on the page? --Gstree (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I think we should. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:53, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Are you referring to ad whitelisting, or to something else? --Gryllida (talk) 17:52, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
I am not talking about whitelisting. I am talking about about ABP replacing ads with new ads -- ads that the advertisers pay ABP to display:
--Guy Macon (talk) 20:57, 20 November 2016 (UTC)