if you use the Chrome browser you might find this interesting...

[janclaes47]

3 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

The problem is that it isn't just ThaiVisa. IMO, any platform that uses Google Ads, does not allow adblockers

Never seen an ad or a nag screen on TV

[chrisinth]

6 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

Never seen an ad or a nag screen on TV

Of course there are different solutions to not seeing ads, but your average user will opt for a simple extension to make this possible.

 

Does your solution also disable cookies, are you aware of what is going on in the background when you run your browser?

Edited November 10, 2018 by chrisinth

[janclaes47]

Just now, chrisinth said:

Of course there are different solutions to not seeing ads, but your average user will opt for a simple extension to make this possible.

That's also all I have

[billsmart]

3 hours ago, Antonymous said:

It is about personal freedom.

 

Tim Cook, Apple Chief Executive, had this to say in a recent speech in Europe. Referring to the misuse of "deeply personal" data, he said it was being "weaponised against us with military efficiency".

 

"We shouldn't sugar-coat the consequences," he added. "This is surveillance."

 

You appear to not care about surveillance. I do and I agree with Benjamin Franklin…

 

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ― Benjamin Franklin

Antonymous, Thanks for your reply and referring to each one of your five points:

1.  I don't see where this issue has anything to do with "personal freedom." You are free to put anything you want on the Internet via Chrome or some other method. No one is prohibiting you from doing that.

2. Tim Cook may be right about our [online] personal data being weaponized and used against us, but again, what does that have to do with Chrome or any other online app?

3, and 4. I do care about surveillance, and that's why I don't do, write, or say anything in a place where I am being surveilled that I want to keep private. 

 

4. and 5. I also agree with Benjamin Franklin's quote, but, again, don't see where it applies to this issue. 

 

I can't think of a pithy little quote which expresses my opinion on this, but if one existed it would be something like this: "Anyone who expects privacy while using public facilities such as a public park, public transportation, a public toilet, or the public Internet is a fool."

[Vacuum]

16 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

Does your solution also disable cookies, are you aware of what is going on in the background when you run your browser?

...don't forget the so all important JS.

[topt]

52 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

I enabled my adblocker

Just curious if you have one why you do not use all the time - or certainly all the time with TV?

 

[topt]

43 minutes ago, billsmart said:

"Anyone who expects privacy while using public facilities such as a public park, public transportation, a public toilet, or the public Internet is a fool."

I don't disagree but playing devils advocate why shouldn't people expect that what that they look at on the internet is personal to them and that the information is not being collated and referenced back to them in some way? 

I am not talking govt. agencies here but commercial companies including search and social media.

[bendejo]

3 hours ago, Vacuum said:

The thing is that Google/Chrome 'owns' Firefox (more or less). However, FF is still the only browser that you can modify to your liking.

 

A while back I mentioned the connection between google and Mozilla here on TVF and somebody really took it badly, including name calling, for saying such a thing.  I don't know who or what this guy was about, but I definitely touched a nerve.  Probably drunk.

 

I use the Iron browser, available at portableapps.com, a modified version of Chrome, but I only use it for gmail and a few sites that are not FF friendly.

 

 

[chrisinth]

8 minutes ago, topt said:

Just curious if you have one why you do not use all the time - or certainly all the time with TV?

 

During the last upgrade to the TV platform (or the one before that?), if an adblocker was detected you would get a time limited block to the site. Without running script/disabling JS etc, I found it easier to whitelist TV in the adblocker so it wouldn't run on the site. I just have left it like that. I'm not sure if that is still the same?

 

For most other surfing it is running.

[topt]

3 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

During the last upgrade to the TV platform (or the one before that?), if an adblocker was detected you would get a time limited block to the site. Without running script/disabling JS etc, I found it easier to whitelist TV in the adblocker so it wouldn't run on the site. I just have left it like that. I'm not sure if that is still the same?

 

For most other surfing it is running.

I think, if memory serves me correctly, after a lot of complaints TV backed down on this. I know I certainly don't see loads of ads on TV - which my browser is set to block.

[NanLaew]

7 hours ago, quandow said:

I'm currently primary caregiver for a relative in the states, getting her ready to pass. She has an Alexa in her front room. That damned thing listens to our conversation and sends messages to my smart watch based on those conversations. Absolutely no other way this focused advertising could be learned then forwarded to me. We are truly living in the era of Big Brother - and so many fools willingly PAY to have Big Brother come into their homes.

Well you're the one that bought the smart watch, no?

 

Do you have a FB presence as well?