core2

Would it make sense to accept credit card skimmers on Credit Card Conference?

Respect for changing the license. Thank you!

How much money will EFF negotiate from Google to enable Ads? AdBlock got 500 Mil, you can go for a Billion. Go Go Go.

I've sent "Do Not Charge" signal to the cashier on my way out of the store. He said I need Charge Badger, but it's not available until 2017. I've tried also "Do Not Track", but he refused to close his eyes. He charged me. Damn.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/21/mozilla-will-soon-launch-sp...

Mozilla is going to remove ads (tracking - all ads use tracking) from web pages and display ads before that, in new browser window.

Content publishers recieve nothing, cos they have to work for free. This is Internet - it's free.

nice :)

Mate, the option, when you enable it - it's disables all ads and tracking from Google and some other networks.

It's doesn't matter on what network you are, on what device.

I'm on desktop dual Xeon, with high bandwidth, and this feature disables Adsense ads. It's not disable some other Ad networks, for which Mozilla never heard of, but most of the Ads are disabled.

"No they are not modifying your code at all."

Content is modified, some ads are stripped away.

The problem: New feature from Mozilla (not enabled by default) disables Google Adsense Ads.

Mate, I'm really sorry to participate this discussion. I never had such bad experience. So many downvotes, make me feel really bad.

I see here most people are "users". I was expecting here to find people that actually work in tech, make their money from internet.

I can't understand how you do you see the world, without payment for your work.

It's very easy to talk about privacy rights, bandwidth issues, but the problem here is pure business.

The people who make content, don't receive payment, while people who consume content - consume it.

You must block whole page, if you do not agree with the terms.

But you want to read the content, without payment.

There are no free lunch, guys.

If this model is accepted by all browsers, please, explain to me who will pay salaries?

C'mon ppl, so many downvotes, please, explain to me, who will pay, IF all browsers remove ads?

I'm using Mozilla, since version phoenix 0.3... I'm fan of open-source.. I'm a freelancer.. My only revenue stream is my websites.

Forgive me I want to support my family.

p.s. I'm really disappointed from the community here. I'd expected more from you guys. Really sad.

I perfectly understand your position of freedom. However, you should understand that the articles you read, are written by people. They have families to support. If you as visitor are not willing to pay, who will pay the salaries of all writers in the world?

The website is a trader, the visitor is a customer. The trader is agreeing to sell the content to the customer if the customer pays the price - view ads (or pay subscription). The visitor agrees with this and receives the content. If the visitor (with the help of the third party tool - browser or extension) disable ads, the visitor is violating the user agreement.

If this option "Disable Ads" is OK, and is accepted by all browsers, this mean there will be nobody willing to write content, because ads are main source of revenue of most of the websites.

I simply cannot understand how this could work.

For me, it's clear that Mozilla will negotiate with Google and other Ad providers to receive some money to remove this feature.

I see your point, but here the problem is not only tracking, but ads serve.

As a content provider, my content is "what the broadcast transmitter sent", this is a code sent from my server to the browser of the client. Now Mozilla and AdBlock extensions are modifying my code. It's very clear what I wish to send - my code, but this program is modifying my code. Superfish and other injection malware replace parts of my code with theirs, while ad blockers and Mozilla, just remove some of my code.

As a content provider, ads or subscription (ad free) are my only ways to monetize.

It's very hypocritical to disable ads and in the same time to make 97% of your money from Ad company.

Almost all of Mozilla's revenue for 2013, the last year for which it has reported financials, came from search deals that make various providers, notably Google, the default in Firefox. Of the $314 million in revenue for 2013, $306 million, or 97%, came from the search deals. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2862717/mozilla-were-no...

They are abusing their dominate positions and basically stealing from websites. The product "Mozilla" will be very popular because of the feature "Disable Ads and Track". They could make tons of donations because of that. And websites, that actually create content will serve content for free.

I'm aware with ambitions of ISPs in Europe to disable ads for mobile, in the same way as Mozilla. They hope to milk Google, just like Mozilla and AdBlock. http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/2/7963577/google-ads-get-thro... http://www.businessinsider.com/google-microsoft-amazon-taboo... http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/15/8610741/mobile-carriers-eu...

I don't like tracking, bad ads and so on, but I don't believe some guys from Mozilla can decide what is good and what is not.

Imagine cable operator or TV manifacture to do the same as Mozilla. They disable ads on all programs they stream. Do you think this is legal?

Any modification of content by browser, ISP or any third party should be illegal.