
Chrome will soon ad-block an entire website if it shows abusive ads - mikeleeorg
https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/5/18063906/chrome-71-update-abusive-ads-blocking-december-2018
======
move-on-by
If they cared about their users then they would follow suite with Firefox,
Safari, Opera, and even IE to block intrusive tracking [1]. Instead they take
this anti-competitive action and increase the amount of tracking by auto-
logging users into their browsers.

[1] [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/11/google-chromes-
users-t...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/11/google-chromes-users-take-
back-seat-its-bottom-line)

------
slededit
With their tight grip on the internet ad market, this is trundling dangerously
close to anti-competitive behavior. They must feel very secure in their
lobbying efforts.

------
2-chainz
As the article alluded to at the end there, this is yet another reminder that
Google has way too much control. It's easy to hop on the bandwagon without
reading into the implications here because almost everyone hates instrusive
ads, but letting one company decide what does and doesn't get to be content on
the web isn't healthy for a free internet.

~~~
londons_explore
The internet is in an uncomfortable position.

On one hand, users hate more intrusive ads.

On the other hand, if some people on the internet show intrusive ads while
others dont, it's the people who show intrusive ads who will end up making
most profit.

Google is trying to use their monopoly position to break out of that cycle.

------
gnulinux
Google's primary business is selling ads but they ad-block any website they
consider "abusive"? How does that make sense? What stops them blocking all ads
except Google ads?

~~~
yayana
Given the separation between chrome and ad words, I think the abusive ad could
even be from google..

> How does that make sense?

Lack of regulation has led to Google erecting its own rules and Chinese walls
that may or may not hold up to eventual challenges?

> What stops them blocking all ads except Google ads?

Google specifically wants to prevent its own ads on a web site marked abusive
or otherwise imperfect. In general, Google is willing to forgo space to try to
guarantee what brand marketers want. If some large brands stop bidding on a
class of ads over any concern, Google looses a lot more value in its real
estate than if it has less real estate.

~~~
gnulinux
> Given the separation between chrome and ad words, I think the abusive ad
> could even be from google..

I'm not trying to get investment advice or trying to manipulate the market,
this is an honest question. How should investors react in situations like
this? If Google Chrome's this new feature ends up being very effective, Chrome
will be more successful but Google will have less ad revenue (possibly). Is
GOOG safer now or what?

~~~
move-on-by
This has no negative effect on Google- but it is anti-competitive. If you read
the title again you’ll see it’s only about blocking abusive ads- not abusive
websites in general. Google’s own advertising will not trigger this since
google itself has already approved them. There is a 30 day review period for
website owners to remove said abusive ads- so you can rest assured knowing
that google will not flag a website to remove google ads. This new feature is
definitely not an ad blocker. It’s much more inline with a competition blocker
or even a censorship tool. If not anti-competitive, perhaps it’s come from new
work being done for China.

------
taobility
Porn websites would hate Chrome and google!

