Search the Community

Adblock: Google did not slow down and lag YouTube performance with ad blocker on by Sayan Sen Back in November, the internet was abuzz with conspiracy theories of Google purposely slowing down YouTube on Mozilla Firefox while its own browser, Chrome, would work fine. However, those rumors were shot down soon after as Google explained that it was not just Firefox that was the subject of "suboptimal viewing" experience and that it was happening irrespective of the browser. Google put the blame on "installed ad blockers." Fast forward two months, now in January we just had another similar incident with several user reports online of YouTube being slow with adblockers. As is usually the case in these instances, most netizens of course were quick to once again point the finger at Google. The issue was first brought to attention by Reddit users and the thread blew up with many more chiming in to say they were experiencing a similar thing. As it turns out, the bug was not YouTube or Google and was in fact a problem with Adblock and Adblock Plus' recent update Version 5.17.0. Hence if you were using something else like uBlock Origin (like me), you probably did not notice any slowdown. Adblock Plus developers noted the issue as performance regression on its GitLab repo. It wrote: Recently, ABP released version 3.22 which upgraded the bundled extension engine version to 1.1.1. AdBlock released version 5.17.0 which also updated the extension engine to version 1.1.1. We've had several reports of slow response time since the update. It appears to be an issue in the extension engine since ABP, AdBlock, and the EWE test extension all seem to experience a similar issue with the 1.1.1 version of the extension engine. The issue has now been fixed with the latest eyeo's Web Extension Ad Blocking Toolkit (EWE) version 1.1.2, where the breaking change has been reverted. Name: @eyeo/webext-ad-filtering-solution New version: 1.1.2 Reverted "Content filters are now updated via the history.pushState() event, when single page apps navigate using the browser's history API (EE-14, EE-90)". Breaking changes: None. Other changes: Reverted performance regression. Hence, if you are one of those users who is experiencing issues with Adblock and Adblock Plus, you should update your extension. It is also advised not to run multiple content filters or adblockers on your browser if you are facing performance issues. As an online publication, Neowin too relies on ads for operating costs and, if you use an ad blocker, we'd appreciate being whitelisted. In addition, we have an ad-free subscription for $28 a year, which is another way to show support!

YouTube appears to be slowing itself down upon detecting ad blockers by Steve Bennett As Google continues to wage war on ad-blocking users who access YouTube, a recent discovery has been made that the site itself will load significantly slower and almost freeze upon detecting an ad blocker. Similar to previous attempts to slow down the site and the introduction of prompts to disable ad blockers, which will prevent viewing of content until the user does so, this change has been discovered to be increasing CPU load for the site, which disappears as soon as the page is reloaded without an ad blocker enabled. In a thread on the YouTube subreddit, users noticed that not just the site but video buffering was slowed with an aim to make YouTube unusable when accessed while ad-blocking software is enabled. An unintended side effect of these changes is that it's causing crashes within another Google product, Google Chrome. https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/195octe/youtube_started_slowing_video_buffer_with_adblock/ Tests by PCGamer have shown that when YouTube is open with AdBlock enabled, CPU load on the author's specific machine is increased by approximately 17% compared to when the add-on is disabled. Additionally, even when users have YouTube Premium subscriptions, the slowdown still happens, with tests still producing an approximate 15-18% CPU load increase. Google, and therefore YouTube, have declined to comment on the recent discoveries. However, given the implementation of a deliberate five-second delay to video loading that was introduced back in November, this latest move is hardly surprising. Google's position on the matter makes it clear that the company wishes to give users who use ad blockers a "suboptimal viewing" experience. As an online publication, Neowin also relies on ads for operating costs and, if you use an ad blocker, we'd appreciate being whitelisted. In addition, we have an ad-free subscription for $28 a year, which is another way to show support! Source: 9to5Google; PCGamer Update: Adblock has explained why Google isn't even the culprit for the slow YouTube performance.

YouTube gets more aggressive in pushing adblock warnings with countdown timer by Omer Dursun YouTube continues ramping up its efforts to push more users to its paid Premium subscription. The platform has begun testing a new anti-adblocker popup version aimed at non-paying (non-Premium) viewers. According to a new Reddit post, the updated warning includes a countdown timer in the top right corner, indicating how long the user has left to take action before the ad plays. Based on initial reports, the timer appears to run for 30-60 seconds. The rest of the warning box remains the same, explaining the benefits of YouTube Premium and providing the options to "Allow YouTube Ads" or "Try YouTube Premium." A screenshot of the new warning popup was shared on Reddit. Several users confirmed seeing the timed warning as well, indicating YouTube is currently testing this with a limited number of accounts. In June, YouTube limited viewers to three videos when an ad blocker was detected. It then allowed users to allow ads or try YouTube Premium, which gives users an ad-free experience for a monthly fee. The platform has been aggressively pushing users to its premium offering, which removes ads entirely. Earlier this year, YouTube launched a "1080p Premium" video quality with a higher bit rate. Last week, this video option became available for desktop. The timed warning represents YouTube's latest tactic to wear down non-paying adblocker users. While workarounds like VPNs and some browsers like Brave exist, these are temporary fixes. YouTube likely has measures planned to counter such methods. Meanwhile, many users resist Premium due to the service's rising costs. A recent price increase brought the individual monthly fee to $13.99 in the US. But prices remain lower in markets like India. The backlash over YouTube's intrusive promotions continues to grow. But the Google-owned company shows no signs of backing off the strategy. The timed warning box is likely the next phase in YouTube's ongoing efforts to push more ad blocker users into paid subscriptions.

YouTube limits viewers to three videos if an adblocker is detected by Paul Hill Do you remember several years ago when it became trendy for websites to detect adblockers and make you disable them? Well, it looks like that’s coming to YouTube. According to Redditor Reddit_n_Me, YouTube now issues a popup to people using an adblocker on YouTube that informs them they can only watch three videos while blocking ads. It then gives you the option to allow ads or try YouTube Premium, which gives you an ad-free experience for a monthly fee. Neowin already reported on the fact that YouTube was trialling a popup to stop adblockers but it seems that the latest iteration of the blocker is more lenient and allow you to watch three videos before you're made to turn off the adblocker. In the popup shown to users, it reads: It looks like you may be using an ad blocker. Video playback will be blocked unless YouTube is allowlisted or the ad blocker is disabled. Ads allow YouTube to stay free for billions of users worldwide. You can go ad-free with YouTube Premium, and creators still get paid from your subscription. According to the Reddit user, he was using Adblock with Chrome when the notification popped up. It’s not clear whether all adblocking software will cause the popup to trigger or just some of them. The popup has been confirmed by YouTube to BleepingComputers. The company said that it was running a small experiment globally that urges YouTubers to allow ads or try YouTube Premium - if you haven’t seen the popup but use an adblocker, it probably just means you’re not included in the trial. YouTube Premium is not exactly the cheapest option around, coming in at $11.99/£11.99/CAD $11.99/AU $14.99 per month. YouTube Premium is also not available everywhere in the world so some people would be forced into watching ads. We’ll have to wait and see if the notification becomes a permanent fixture but for now, it’s limited to just a select group of users. Let us know in the comments if you have seen this popup and which browsers and adblocker combo you use. As an online publication, Neowin too relies on ads for operating costs and, if you use an ad blocker, we'd appreciate being whitelisted. In addition, we have an ad-free subscription for $28 a year, which is another way to show support! Source and Image: Reddit_n_Me (Reddit) via BleepingComputer

YouTube confirms that it is testing out blocking ad blockers on the site by Steve Bennett Even though many websites on the internet are available for free, a large proportion of their income comes from advertisements, especially on YouTube where a lot of content creators earn income from ads within their videos. There are ad blockers out there however which prevent these adverts from displaying, denying the sites of income. Earlier this week, reports were posted to Reddit that, when attempting to play videos on YouTube a prompt was displayed that prevented playback until ad-blocking software was disabled. This was later confirmed by a YouTube employee on the YouTube subreddit. While it may be fairly clear why YouTube has decided to start testing this feature with a view to implementing it in the future, given that a large portion of income for not just YouTube but creators as well comes from the ads. However, many users in the same thread have expressed frustration at YouTube with their apparent increase in ad placement within videos on the site. Of course, the same prompt encourages users to try YouTube Premium, which includes the removal of adverts within videos, and YouTube is wanting to drive subscriptions to the platform, hoping to capture users who wish to continue not seeing adverts on the site. Even though YouTube has looked into separate tiers of Premium to just block ads with no other perks, this has not come to light and only the main tier continues to exist in individual and family plans. Source: 9to5Google

Google gives adblockers in Chrome another year as it postpones Manifest V3 by Taras Buria Last year, Google announced plans to phase out Manifest V2-based browser extensions in favor of new Manifest V3 policies. Although Manifest V3 promises increased safety and "peace of mind," developers argue that the new rules hurt innovations, decrease performance, and cripple content blockers without giving much better security. Google initially wanted to disable Manifest V2 extensions in Chrome in January 2023 but has now decided to revise its plans. In a new Chrome Developers blog post, the company describes an updated timeframe for migrating from Manifest V2 to Manifest V3. Although Google remains on track to ditch old extensions, developers and customers gained one more year for using and supporting Manifest V2-based extensions. According to the revised schedule, Google will remove them from the Chrome Web Store on January 2024. Besides the new timeframe, Google has described how it plans to take a gradual and experimental approach to turning off Manifest V2 to "ensure a smooth end-user experience." This approach includes two stages: In January 2023, Chrome 112 will get new flags for disabling Manifest V2 in Canary, Dev, and Beta. In June 2023, Chrome 115 will receive the same flags in the Stable Channel. The new experimental flags will help customers see how removing Manifest V2 affects their browsing experience. Google also urges developers to release Manifest V3 extensions during the transition period. Unlike the original blog post, the new version does not explicitly say when Manifest V2 extensions will stop working in Chrome. The company only says old extensions "may stop working at any time following the aforementioned dates." To give developers an extra nudge, Google says Manifest V3 will be a must for those wanting to get the recently introduced "Featured" badge in the Chrome Web Store. Google uses that badge to help customers spot extensions that follow "the best technical practices and meet a high standard of user experience and design." Here is the revised schedule to govern the Manifest V3 implementation: In January 2023, Manifest V3 will be a requirement if a developer wants to get their extension featured with a badge in the Chrome Web Store. In June 2023, Google will stop accepting public Manifest V2 extensions in the Chrome Web Store. Existing Manifest V2 extensions will switch from public to unlisted. Delisted extensions remain accessible in the Chrome Web Store only via direct links. In January 2024, Google will remove all Manifest V2 extensions from the Chrome Web Store. Finally, Google promises to improve Manifest V3 and incorporate changes based on feedback from the community and developers. The rules have already received a fair share of improvements, and the company says more to come. Developers can track the progress in the official documentation. Developers of popular content-blocking extensions are already working tirelessly to ensure they can provide the same user experience after switching to Manifest V3. AdGuard, for example, recently published its first experimental Manifest V3-based extension. Although it is significantly limited compared to the current version, the new extension proves that content blockers will survive Manifest V3 migration (partially, at least). Meanwhile, developers of other browsers take a more aggressive stand and promise not to implement similar rules in their projects. As an online publication, Neowin too relies on ads for operating costs and, if you use an ad blocker, we'd appreciate being whitelisted. In addition, we have an ad-free subscription for $28 a year, which is another way to show support!

The EFF will fight Google Chrome Manifest v3 which kills extensions that reliably block ads by Alap Naik Desai Google Chrome will gradually undergo a fundamental revision, and it will deeply impact all extensions for the web browser. The upcoming revised set of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), collectively known as Manifest v3, will essentially kill all popular ad-blocking extensions. The Electronic Frontier Foundation or EFF has vowed to fight this change, but it could be a losing battle. The EFF has promised to take on Google, and attempt to convince the tech giant to rethink the Chrome Manifest v3. Essentially, the consortium is trying to repeal the detrimental set of APIs which primarily seek to decimate some specific and popular extensions for the Chrome web browser. EFF technologists Alexei Miagkov and Bennett Cyphers have reportedly called out Google for deliberately hampering ad blocking extensions under the guise of development. “According to Google, Manifest v3 will improve privacy, security, and performance. We fundamentally disagree. The changes in Manifest v3 won’t stop malicious extensions, but will hurt innovation, reduce extension capabilities, and harm real-world performance,” stated Miagkov. Manifest V3, the latest set of changes to 🧩 Chrome extensions, goes live in just two weeks. We completely agree with @EFF and the rest of the community in their firm belief that Manifest V3 brings more harm than good.https://t.co/TpBbZuPUOL — AdGuard (@AdGuard) December 14, 2021 Technical jargon aside, the Manifest v3 is a big departure from the Manifest v2, on which the Google Chrome web browser currently runs. In its current iteration, the Manifest v2 has an API which is a blocking version of "webRequest". It allows extensions to intercept incoming network data and process/filter it before it gets displayed in the browser. However, Google is replacing the powerful and effective API with "declarativeNetRequest". Needless to mention, this API essentially declaws the ad blockers and renders them nearly useless. Essentially, under the new Manifest v3, ad blockers may have to perform the role of a bystander, instead of a gatekeeper. Google has steadfastly maintained that it must limit the capabilities of Chrome extensions so that “their powers to observe and alter the contents of pages are not so easily abused by bad or hijacked extensions.” These proposed changes are highly concerning primarily because browsers like Brave and Microsoft Edge rely on Google's open-source Chromium project as a base. This means ad blockers for these web browsers would also lose their effectiveness. Perhaps Google could drive up the adoption of Mozilla Firefox, but only if the web browser takes a firm stand, which it hasn’t, yet.

Anti-ad blocking firm, Admiral, deals potentially damaging blow to adblockers by Paul Hill Over the last few days, EasyList, a source used by ad blocking software that defines which URLs to filter recently saw a strange Github commit affect its repository. An EasyList maintainer removed a single line of code from the repo which defined ‘functionalclam.com’ as a distributor of ads. He claimed the removal was due to a DMCA takedown request. The question now is, does the DMCA actually apply to domain names? If so, this is very bad news for ad blockers because the lists they rely on could be forced to essentially close down. According to the US Copyright Office, copyright law doesn’t protect domain names: “Copyright law does not protect domain names. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a nonprofit organisation that assumed the responsibility for domain name system management, administers the assigning of domain names through accredited registers.” Admiral, an anti-ad blocking company, which was behind the removal of the link said the domain is part of the DMCA copyright access control platform. The company said it remains committed to working with EasyList, AdBlock Plus, and other ad blockers in the future to resolve issues like this. The maintainer which removed the domain from the source code said: “We had no option but to remove the filter without putting the Easylist repo in jeopardy. If it is a Circumvention/Adblock-Warning adhost, it should be removed from Easylist even without the need for a DMCA request … We’ll certainly look at our legal options and it will be contested if we get DMCA requests for any legit adservers or websites that use DMCA as a way to limit Easylist’s ability to block ads.” The well-respected Electronic Frontier Foundation has reached out to EasyList to offer any legal assistance should the project need any. Neowin understands users' desire to use ad blockers, many ads are obtrusive and even dangerous! Neowin tries its best to ensure that ads aren't intrusive or dangerous. We request that users add Neowin to their ad blocking whitelist to continue supporting our content. Source: Adguard | Image via Aitnews

VPN-based ad blockers banned from iOS App Store by Paul Hill Several VPN-based ad blockers on the iOS App Store will no longer receive updates after Apple decided to enforce guideline rules. The developer behind Adblock and Weblock stated that Apple has begun rejecting updates to the apps because they violate the App Store Developer Guidelines. According to Apple, the blocked updates aren’t the result of a new policy but an existing one. Apple’s Developer Guidelines read: “Apps should use APIs and frameworks for their intended purposes and indicate that integration in their app description. For example, the HomeKit framework should provide home automation services; and HealthKit should be used for health and fitness purposes and integrate with the Health app.” It’s a little unclear why Apple has only just now decided to start blocking the affected apps but some suggest that part of the reason for the block is because Apple displays ads in iOS 11’s Apple News app and these were being blocked by the ad blocking apps. Now that Apple is working to stop VPN-based ad blockers, the only type of acceptable ad blocker will be those which use the Safari Content Blocker (SCB). The SCB only blocks ads that appear within the Safari app, rather than across other apps, like the VPN-based clients do. Source: ZDNet

Searched, and didn't find this: Link What was that about doing no evil? Personally, I'd rather give the developer a few dollars up front for their app, rather than look at ads--They're the most annoying things ever. Just another reason to root your device. I might make the plunge here pretty soon on my N7. How do you guys feel about this?