Question one: does this mean they will be legally liable if malware makes it onto their ad network. Question two: I was hearing that part of their method of evading ad blockers will be to remove or hide semantic information. Will that violate FTC regulations around disclosing sponsored posts. Assuming that the answer is yes to both questions I am in favor of their plan to evade ad blockers. The financial hit should be significantly higher than the additional revenue from showing a few more ads. Unfortunately for them I have a highly sophisticated neural network established for filtering ads after they have been sent to my browser.
Weirdly, I don't get any F#c*Book ads. I think I trained them.
They used to "embed" ads in the "news feed" (dumbest name that, but anyhoo). The moment my page reached an ad in the feed, I shut off the browser. I mean immediately.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2016-08-10 09:05 pm (UTC)Question two: I was hearing that part of their method of evading ad blockers will be to remove or hide semantic information. Will that violate FTC regulations around disclosing sponsored posts.
Assuming that the answer is yes to both questions I am in favor of their plan to evade ad blockers. The financial hit should be significantly higher than the additional revenue from showing a few more ads. Unfortunately for them I have a highly sophisticated neural network established for filtering ads after they have been sent to my browser.
I mean this in the nicest possible way
Date: 2016-08-10 09:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2016-08-11 01:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2016-08-11 02:21 am (UTC)They used to "embed" ads in the "news feed" (dumbest name that, but anyhoo). The moment my page reached an ad in the feed, I shut off the browser. I mean immediately.
No ads since. That was almost two years ago.
(no subject)
Date: 2016-08-11 06:55 am (UTC)