Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"You can't come here unless you turn of ad blockers...."
I go somewhere else.
I generally agree. Although sometimes one wishes to pillage content which a site holds hostage behind some paywall or nagwall.
It is in these instances that I like to archive the page, or disassemble the site assets to see if the content can be extracted without loading all their BS. ...or retrieving the site through proxy as the OP was attempting.
OP, it is a matter of rotating through all of your available proxies until you find one that isn't preemptively blocked.
Where we are today is basically a tech war between the sites and their advertisers, verses the browsers and customers.
Sites with ads become a bit intrusive, so the costumer gets an ad blocker. The site doesn't make as much as it thinks it should, so it increases the number of ads, and begins blocking people with ad blockers. Better ad blockers come out and sites block even more people that they think are blocking them.
The only thing I have against it is that some sites now use so many ads it stops my system, mid load, for several seconds. (Up to a full minute.)
That and I keep getting a pop up that says "site not responding, continue or kill" or something to that effect. And I get the pop up, each time an ad fails to load in a timely manner.
The whole system is unsupportable. And the current subscription plans are ridiculous too. I am not going to get a $5 a months subscription for a site that I read two articles a month from. There have been several suggested alternative systems, but I think the advertisers and the people coding sites to inject 1001 ads, and the ad blocker companies don't want to change course.
Some people thrive on things that make the rest of us miserable.
Where we are today is basically a tech war between the sites and their advertisers, verses the browsers and customers.
Well, aside from the fact that the major browsers are all produced by, or in cahoots with, said advertisers.
Quote:
Sites with ads become a bit intrusive, so the costumer gets an ad blocker. The site doesn't make as much as it thinks it should, so it increases the number of ads, and begins blocking people with ad blockers. Better ad blockers come out and sites block even more people that they think are blocking them.
Passive ad blockers are generally list based, which is always playing a game of catch up and stuff inevitably slips through the cracks.
The superior way is not to blacklist, but to whitelist. Use a proper web filter like uMatrix and deny every type of asset and anything that isn't from the 1st party domain.
With this configuration, without even having to do anything else or rely on fallible lists, ads have basically no chance to load. And their malicious anti-ad blocker detection methods also get blocked by default since most of that garbage relies on javascript.
Firefox won't let me see this page, something about security risks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
