Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

56% Positive

Analyzed from 2709 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#ads#facebook#site#don#com#block#website#blocking#content#reddit

Discussion (94 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

akerstenabout 2 hours ago
They do this by adding a ton of useless markup and splitting words like "ad" into single-letter spans with random class names and 8-layer deep nests of `<div>` so it's very hard to write selectors against. One has to wonder how that div soup affects accessibility as I find it very unlikely that this content is presented nicely to assistive tools. I hope they get all the ADA suits they deserve for this.
neuralkoiabout 1 hour ago
I recently found this out the hard way. Instagram’s web app has a super annoying popup. To click the comments button for a post, your cursor has to pass over the username, which just happens to launch a profile preview with the “follow” button exactly where the comments button was, causing you to unintentionally follow the account.

I tried to block this popup with uBlock Origin to no avail. No matter what element I selected, it was still there. Finally fixed the problem by deleting my Instagram account.

zenoprax38 minutes ago
A counter example: I got caught out by the deprecation/sunsetting of anonymous "old.reddit.com" yesterday but it turns out uBlock can filter out the ads, boilerplate, sidebars, join/login buttons etc on the main site. It's actually faster and more usable than the old site now.

Small win.

m348e91215 minutes ago
>I got caught out by the deprecation/sunsetting of anonymous "old.reddit.com" yesterday

It appears to still be up for me. ??

dayone114 minutes ago
How do you filter it out? Do you select each element individually?
greenleafone7about 1 hour ago
Best move you could have possibly done.
srcnkclabout 1 hour ago
“A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.”
c-hendricksabout 1 hour ago
Last I tried writing custom rules for Facebook was years ago, but they did have proper aria attributes, and uBlock origin does have selectors for text content. These are from 2020:

  facebook.com##span:has-text(Suggested for You):xpath(../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../..)
  facebook.com##div[aria-label="Sponsored"] span[aria-label="Sponsored"]:xpath(../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../..)
  facebook.com##div[aria-label="Sponsored"]:xpath(../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../../..)
acabal43 minutes ago
But can't they just use an xpath expression to test the computed text content of a node, like `/path/to/ad/div[contains(., 'sponsored')]`? In that expression, there could be any number of nested elements inside the terminal `<div>` and it wouldn't matter. (And you'd probably have to use a regex test to account for tricky white space.)
JumpCrisscrossabout 1 hour ago
> so it's very hard to write selectors against

This sounds perfectly matched for an on-device LLM?

pjc50about 1 hour ago
The power cost of doing this widely would be staggering, surely?
Terretta38 minutes ago
Worth a white paper to see which costs less energy, using Apple's built in LLM, or downloading and displaying all the FB ads using radio, playback, and screen animation energy.
StableAlkyne17 minutes ago
Local models are not the same as the giant ones in data centers. They're in about the about the same ballpark as running a AAA game on max settings.

Sure, it's more computationally-expensive than running an HTML selection, but it's also not "staggering" by any reasonable stretch.

mkeedlingerabout 1 hour ago
Depending on the model, I’m guessing it’s dwarfed by just about any electron app
toomuchtodoabout 1 hour ago
Apple Intelligence? I mean, you're only processing for the time your "AI|browser|agent" is acting as a firewall between you and Meta. Cache locally after processing and filtering. Use alongside the accessibility API. LLMs can, in many cases, reliably solve CAPTCHAs. I find it difficult to imagine they cannot defeat Meta ad blocking countermeasures.

EFF: Adversarial Interoperability - https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera...

benj111about 1 hour ago
Could you not just go after the deeply nested spans? I assume they aren't messing up everything else like that.
mcintyre1994about 1 hour ago
Based on inspect element on their homepage, they probably are.
drnick1about 2 hours ago
Blacklisting facebook.com at the DNS level has worked pretty well for me.
amazingamazingabout 1 hour ago
That works, but is not really blocking the ads.
snapplebobappleabout 1 hour ago
I agree. We should call that "blocking the bads" since the overwhelming majority of things served from that domain are bad.
prmoustacheabout 1 hour ago
facebook ads are indeed blocked.
wompapumpumabout 1 hour ago
you sure about that?
whywhywhywhy44 minutes ago
The approach they should have taken is to start whitelisting the components that are not ads.

Think of how the structure of Meta is gonna work, there's some team in charge of ads who has a sub team now in charge of messing with the ads to stop them being blocked.

If you start whitelisting everything that isn't an ad you move the problem into an area the team in charge of blocking the ads don't have control over.

Highly unlikely the team in charge of stopping ad blocking has swing to then start changing the code of every other element on the page to break your non-ad white listing.

doodlebugging6 minutes ago
>Highly unlikely the team in charge of stopping ad blocking has swing...

OT but I think I learned a new term today.

Swing. In oil and gas we would call that suction so for future reference:

Swing = Suction

Terretta32 minutes ago
Over a decade ago, web framework and web site generation tooling had already ruined any kind of automated anything, as the frameworks and tools started using what amount to GUIDs for identifiers. I suppose the charitable take on why is as only machines needed to read it, and css styles and div IDs had become token gibberish anyway, so semantics were irrelevant.

Whether selecting for ads or content, one had to figure different ways of getting after it, whitelisting was already off the table.

We'd found "structure" could work, but had to be fuzzy and adaptive as marketing shuffles pages around constantly, not just on the whole, but for A/B runs and personalized "experiences".

So that seems back to, hey, models could help.

(Though none of them, to date, attain as high success as latest hand coded "reader" tools, worth inspecting for how this could be generalized.)

danillonunes21 minutes ago
Can't they mimic the structure of legit content to get passed on the whitelist?
pavel_lishinabout 1 hour ago
I've tried to write a tampermonkey script to at least block the Reels, but even that's hella difficult.

The solution is truly to just never be on Facebook, but - our local PTA only distributes news via Facebook. (There may be a Whatsapp group I don't know about, which isn't better.) So does the local library. If the township publishes things elsewhere, I don't know about it.

I use a service to convert some pages' feeds to RSS, which is semi-reliable, but doesn't work well and is a paid service if you want more than two feeds - I wish I could hand-roll something myself.

VCFundedGenYerabout 1 hour ago
Facebook is trying so hard to defeat adblockers that the actual website is borderilne unusable. I have found in the past year or so that pages just get hung on "loading" transitional screens way more often, even in normal circumstances.

They need to surrender this whole anti-adblocker crusade because it will kill them in the long run (along with the billion other problems FB has)

RiverCrochetabout 1 hour ago
Most activity on Facebook is via phone. I bet Facebook would prefer to get rid of the website entirely; the age of adding Facebook like buttons and comment sections to websites is long past. I can't think of anything that works on the website better than the phone app.
The-Old-Hackerabout 2 hours ago
I use a browser extension called F.B. Purity. It's worked across multiple browsers for years.

https://www.fbpurity.com/

mmscabout 1 hour ago
There's a concern that the developer of FB-purity passed away: https://www.reddit.com/r/facebook/comments/1tw2sf9/real_conc...
damidekronikabout 2 hours ago
I was gonna say that uBlock still works for me on facebook, but yea I forgot I had purity quietly working for me for all those years
VCFundedGenYerabout 1 hour ago
Same. FBP has been effectively perfect for over a decade now. I don't understand how uBlock Origin can't just take what FBP is doing and apply it there.
greenleafone7about 1 hour ago
Best solution is to never use any of those useless apps ever again.
maxwellito7 minutes ago
Hot take: uBlock origin could insert even MORE ads into Facebook? Discouraging people to use Facebook, and also make some money on the side.

(this is a joke obviously, but boy that would be fun and against the T&C)

doodlebugging2 minutes ago
Maintain a list of recent ads blocked in that browsing session and redirect all the ads blocked during that session from previous sites visited, especially autoplaying videos, every time someone clicks on a Facebook link.

That would be funny.

nelsonicabout 1 hour ago
Very simple: just block all Meta domains at your local DNS. Nobody needs Meta. And if there is something you desperately need to see on one of their platforms temporarily switch your DNS.
jcfreiabout 2 hours ago
Once LLMs get fast enough at processing real-time images Apple (or anybody really) can just roll out a browser rendering engine that just masks all ads. It will take a few years but the browser ad-business is in it's terminal phase.
monoosoabout 2 hours ago
Given that Safari doesn't even have a built-in ad-blocker, I doubt Apple will be leading the charge on this.

Such a move would also presumably be incompatible with Apple's highly lucrative search engine deal with Google.

gdulliabout 1 hour ago
It's amazing how people think Apple has a clean reputation because they've added a thin layer of indirection to their participation in the surveillance ecosystem.
pllbnkabout 1 hour ago
The race of ending personal computing is there. I am sure big players want to control entire stack and users just sitting in front of dumb monitors consuming their ads.
concindsabout 1 hour ago
Safari was the first to cripple adblockers and went further than ManifestV3, but it seems their reputation will never catch up to that.
threetonesunabout 1 hour ago
If we're just talking about image based ads it would be easier to simply denylist every image on a page and only render alt-text until the user clicks to reveal it.

Worth noting though that Apple injects ads into the News app, which is just a webview, so it's certainly not them that will do this.

whywhywhywhy42 minutes ago
You're trying to stop ads because they're malicious but you think they'd be honest with their alt text?

Ignoring that users care deeply about images so a browser that did this would be considered broken from the get go.

pavel_lishinabout 1 hour ago
I wonder what percentage of images even has meaningful alt-text.
nemomarxabout 1 hour ago
If it doesn't have alt text it can't have been that important as an image, I guess.
metahostabout 2 hours ago
Apple sells ads too; increasingly across its surfaces.
Eddy_Viscosity2about 2 hours ago
This is the first and only use-case for LLMs that I am genuinely excited about.
AlexandrBabout 1 hour ago
Such naïveté. The much more likely scenario is that AI is used to add or replace ads in a website in a way that's now impossible to remove. Running your own AI on the browser will be disallowed to "ensure a safe browsing experience".
vintermannabout 1 hour ago
Yes, it's a near-universal legal requirement that humans be able to tell if something is an ad or not. So once they sabotage that, they're in hot water.
pjc5038 minutes ago
I was under the impression that America had very few legal restrictions on ads at all.
AlexandrBabout 1 hour ago
Is there any enforcement of this? Like at all? All the review bots and bots promoting random crap on reddit say otherwise. Traditional media still pays lip-service to this, but only barely.
sentrysapperabout 1 hour ago
You anticipate a large language model to understand visual queues for an advertisement?
whywhywhywhy39 minutes ago
Cost issues aside yeah image embedding tech is really good and can already do tasks like this, LLMs with native image understanding are even better at it.

Reasons this wouldn't work are you'd really need to get it to a good enough and small enough model to run low energy use and very fast to not impact browsing. The other issue is it'll be a fixed target for a period of time so the ads could be tweaked to find how to get them through it.

triceratopsabout 1 hour ago
Cues, not queues. And yes that sounds workable.
OroPlaabout 1 hour ago
I have to admit that I never got to visit facebook in all my life, since my browser add-ons made it so the site would never properly load. I'm not sure whether I've been missing out or dodging a bullet.
beardyw4 minutes ago
You have missed nothing.
Advertisement
baggachipzabout 2 hours ago
SirFattyabout 2 hours ago
that's not irony.
nticompassabout 2 hours ago
Man, am I happy that I deleted my Facebook. No regrets.
nepthar10 minutes ago
This is a perfect use case for AI, no?
hollow-moeabout 1 hour ago
This doesn't set a good precedent unfortunately... Hello to that Google guy that just got tasked to do the same with Youtube.
lucrbviabout 1 hour ago
It would be fun to train a small vision neural network to recognize ads instead of relying on HTML or network requests. I don't know if anyone has done this yet.
classified7 minutes ago
This barf bag of a company is making the internet a war zone. If at all possible, the best you can do is to never touch their toxic mess.
molticrystal34 minutes ago
If anybody want to take a crack at fixing and maintaining the issue, while the team has been worn out to the treads, they are still open to pull requests [0], here is the statement that is alluded to in the article:

>paintboth1234 uBO Team wrote:

>The project is FOSS. Anyone else who wants to deal with this disgusting site is free to make pull requests with working solutions themselves.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1vgcjg5/about...

cptaj25 minutes ago
I'm not saying this is a rallying call to help but...
red_admiralabout 1 hour ago
My setup: separate profile for Facebook. Targeted advertising turned off. FB domains blocked on main profile.

Not perfect, but it works.

gregoriolabout 1 hour ago
So basically Facebook ads won and we are doomed
Advertisement
Marsymarsabout 1 hour ago
The immediate fix to this is regulatory action.

Facebook has made itself indispensable in a number of areas that are in the public interest and should be treated as a public good for these purposes.

Ads are pollution, and Facebook is forcing people to choose between ingesting pollution and using facebook marketplace, or throwing their used but functional goods in the garbage.

qup43 minutes ago
IMO you shouldn't get to be in charge of a company just because it became successful.

Facebook is allowed to make ads show on their own product.

I hate their product, but it's theirs.

Marsymars34 minutes ago
> IMO you shouldn't get to be in charge of a company just because it became successful.

In a macro sense, the prerogative there is really up to the public. Companies only exist in the first place because the public has granted them the legal and social framework to exist, and the public can adjust that framework as they so choose.

In a more specific sense, the math there changes once a company makes itself indispensable to the public good. There are any number of analogies I could run with, but I'll go with the analogy of a landfill. Suppose all the landfills in your city have been privatized, have a habit of burning garbage, and employ armed thugs to prevent any visitors to the landfill from wearing masks. If you've got a truckload of garbage to dispose of, you can either ingest burning garbage fumes, or dump it on the side of the road somewhere. It's absolutely in the public's interest to regulate the landfills' behaviour to prevent them from either burning garbage or from stopping people from wearing masks when they visit the landfill.

XorNotabout 1 hour ago
My solution to this was just to stop using Facebook.

Though evidently someone's cut a deal because Facebook groups is all over Google search results these days.

ufmaceabout 1 hour ago
Well clearly you'll need to stop using Google search too
XorNot44 minutes ago
We've been circling that since "thing reddit" became the most optimum search.
partloyaldemonabout 1 hour ago
I use the “natural” method for blocking Facebook ads.
j4518 minutes ago
Blocking ads sounds like a job for AI
mdrznabout 2 hours ago
amazingamazingabout 1 hour ago
Assuming you insist on using facebook you can proxy it, using a simple script that removes all ads prior to serving. The problem of course is that this is not cheap. Easier to just not use facebook.
drcongoabout 2 hours ago
It's easy, just block every Facebook owned domain there is. Works for me.
1over137about 1 hour ago
Where do you get the list of "every Facebook owned domain"? Can you share?
drcongo19 minutes ago
A quick search on Kagi turns up a ton of them. Here you go: https://github.com/jmdugan/blocklists/blob/master/corporatio...
ImHereToVoteabout 2 hours ago
I don't understand why websites don't just take ownership of ads. Then it will be impossible to block them.
inigyouabout 2 hours ago
Because the ad ecosystem has two sides. I used to think my ISP could just magically support IPv6 and didn't need routing protocols or peering agreements, too. (They support it now)

Websites with ads need to satisfy the ad buyers. This means running a bunch of JavaScript that's adversarial to the website and fingerprints both the website and the browser to determine where and to whom the ad is actually shown. It's like a cloudflare bot challenge is happening behind the scenes. Of course all this stuff doesn't happen on the website's own domain, or the website could manipulate it.

And the ad that's originally delivered might not actually be the ad, but might be a script that fetches the real ad from a different server, if the incentives line up that way. Imagine you have a contract to advertise on a site, but someone else wants to advertise on the same site and pays you to forward their ad. Ad margins are razor thin, you'll do this for $0.00001 profit per impression. And your buyer might be doing the same thing to their customer. It's all a huge mess.

gwbas1cabout 1 hour ago
I think that just goes to prove that content providers and ad providers could defeat ad blockers if they worked together. (And perhaps made the ads less offensive so people don't have motivation to block them.)
ImHereToVoteabout 1 hour ago
It's ironic how trust would solve the issue and ads would become impossible to remove. Trust comes at a huge premium of course.
inigyouabout 1 hour ago
Really shows how shady the whole industry is, even to itself.
stochastic-parrabout 1 hour ago
uBlock can filter arbitrary elements from a website, no chance that every company spends as much as facebook on making writing rules hard
benj111about 1 hour ago
Trust?

In ye old days, you had newspapers who sold ads, and had to at least satisfy their customers. What the newspaper advertised reflected on the newspaper, and where the advertiser advertised, reflected on the advertiser. Now we have a situation where no one is accountable. Spammy ad sites are a thing, because there isn't that direct relationship between advertiser and website.

jefftkabout 1 hour ago
Advertisers don't trust websites to display their ads. If a site takes full control of their ads experience and hosts everything first-party I agree it's hard to block (site can keep changing things to thwart the ad blocker), but then it's also hard for the advertisers to see whether they're being ripped off. Which means most won't advertise on the site, and the site makes much less money than if they remain in the current ad ecosystem (even counting that some ads will be blocked).

(I used to work in this area, but my knowledge is ~4y out of date)

Ekarosabout 1 hour ago
Most sites are not in business of running ad marketplace. They are in content production and SEO(as in pulling views). I don't think at scale they could operate it would be worth to be ad marketplace. Or would they get the customers(advertisers).
nemomarxabout 1 hour ago
Content based ads work fine for this. If you have a site about some topic, advertisers for that audience can just pay you some amount to put their ad in your posts or embed an image.

Networks are only necessary if you want to run new ads for every year or tie into their browsing history or other algorithmic stuff. But if someone wants to pay you 3k to run a banner ad for a few weeks that would be pretty easy to just embed.

cookiengineerabout 1 hour ago
> Most sites are not in business of running ad marketplace.

You don't have to run a marketplace. Back then, people were calling via phone to put an ad into the newspaper. The same concept can still apply today.

You can just place an ad _where you actually want it_ instead of having a shitty decision engine decide it for you. Marketing budgets are messed up all over the place since social media, because they're really inefficient in finding the customers that actually wants to buy their stuff.

If you don't believe me, just take a look at facebook, they're trying to shove ads up your feed 99% of the time. It's a feed of ads, not a feed of "friends" anymore. Good luck trying to catch the 1% of posts that were actually the reason why you used the platform in the first place.

tamimio14 minutes ago
I mean the ultimate solution is block fecebook entirely and any and all its other companies/domains, but I think the best approach is not to block ads, but to block everything and only let the text and other useable html code out, that can’t be countered as your filter is not going after specific match they try to hide behind some long tags, rather than blocking all and just pass the readable useful buttons.