Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Wowfunhappy 2602 days ago
> If a site promises to not use animated images, streaming video, streaming audio, any sort of trackers, any sort of third-party content, and if they keep the screen-real-estate ratio of ads to content relatively low, then I'll whitelist them in a heartbeat.

I just don't think this is a workable model for most users. "You want me to do extra work so I can see some (admittedly nonintrusive) ads? No way, figure out your own business." Honestly, if I started using an adblocker I'm not sure I could force myself to make that effort per website.

I really wish uBlock Origin at least had the option to enable a blacklist model—ie, no sites ever have their ads blocked by default, but as soon as a site annoys me, I can go into my adblocker and disable their ads.

1 comments

>I really wish uBlock Origin at least had the option to enable a blacklist model

It effectively does have this capability. Just disable all the standard filter lists, and manually add one's own entries to the "my filters" section.

This method has the added benefit of enabling other useful privacy features that don't directly relate to display advertising, like killing off the nastiness of hyperlink auditing, CSP reports going to 3rd parties, prefetching, and remote fonts.

Is this per the ad network / server, or per domain like the whitelist? I would have assumed the former, but if it works like the whitelist that's great!