
Web page service workers bypass ad-blockers after Chrome 72 upgrade? - ikisusi
https://twitter.com/jviide/status/1096947294920949760
======
nicoburns
It might sound dramatic, but if they do block or cripple ad blockers, then I
think that could represent a turning point in Chrome's popularity. Even my
non-technical friends use an ad blocker, and it's also one of the best
defenses from viruses on the modern web, so people who do family tech support
are likely to be pretty proactive in ensuring that the computers they look
after are running browsers with ads blocked.

~~~
satokema
I hate Mozilla pushing their own things almost as much as Google (a screenshot
service? I have a keybinding for that, thank you) but this will probably be
the straw that makes me jump ship.

There's always IceCat I guess. Websites get away with loading files from a
ridiculous number of third-party servers and it's pretty frightening when you
look at the uMatrix tab for it.

~~~
simcop2387
Firefox's built in screenshot system provides one things that others don't.
You can screenshot the entire page as a single unit, without having to resize
the window beyond your own screen size.

~~~
jsjohnst
Most plugins I’ve seen for doing screenshots provide that functionality.
Admittedly I’ve not looked much, but any screenshot utility that can’t do that
is pretty much useless to me, so maybe I’ve only looked at ones that had it.

~~~
simcop2387
That might be the case now (I haven't looked either), but back when this was
introduced that wasn't the case.

------
strict9
Even if this is chalked up to something inadvertent, it's only a matter of
time before it happens for good. Google will likely win this arms race, at
least within Chrome.

The browser from the mega company that gets nearly all revenue from ads will
eventually close that hole.

I switched to Firefox about a year ago in anticipation of this specific
change, and haven't missed a thing.

------
coffekaesque
In the past few months several services I (used to) use, one of them being
paid Spotify, started to crack down on adblockers and anti-adblockers killers.
I don't feel this is just a coincidence, together with Chrome changes.

I'm pretty happy about this as I want the ad companies to start getting
desperate and throwing punches. It's like people won't see how bad the
situation is until you they get shit almost literally thrown in their faces.
Tracking, data collection and malware are too invisible for people to care.

~~~
colejohnson66
It wasn’t paid Spotify. It was the free one. People who provide a negative
value to Spotify were having their accounts disabled

------
cronix
It sounds like ad blockers need to work on the os level now and not a browser
extension. Just block all requests from the machine to the ips.

~~~
fzzzy
They’ll just serve the ads from the same ip as the content then, or even embed
it right in the same request as the content.

~~~
FridgeSeal
You’ll face kickback from ad agencies over that: the third party requests are
also used by the agency to track that the impression/click/etc did actually
occur and the publishers aren’t just lying about it to boost their numbers.

~~~
fzzzy
Hmm, that's interesting. Makes sense.

------
verdverm
DNS based blocking still works :]

~~~
okket
Not for Youtube and I guess that is what Google mostly cares about.

------
greymeister
Stop. Using. Chrome.

------
50656E6973
The Twitter thread ends in "submitted a bug report"...this is a feature not a
bug, right?

~~~
Sujan
No, a bug that was even already fixed:
[https://twitter.com/jviide/status/1097199686849581057](https://twitter.com/jviide/status/1097199686849581057)

