http://www.datamation.com/commentary/will-video-ads-wreck-the-internet-1.html

Will Video Ads Wreck the Internet?

Facebook is reportedly bringing auto-play ads to your News Feed. That's just the beginning.

New reports suggest that Facebook will soon unveil video advertising – basically TV commercials on Facebook.

Unlike TV's 30-second standard for ads, Facebook's would be capped at 15 seconds. The ads will be "autoplay," meaning they'll play without any action by the user.

While 15 seconds is short compared with TV, it's long compared with online users' tolerance levels.

The ads would show up in your Facebook news feed in desktop browsers, as well as on mobile phones and tablets.

Auto-play, in-stream advertising is going to annoy users, big-time.

As I mentioned in this space previously, Facebook can get away abusing users more than other social networks because of what I call their "monopoly on everybody."

Google+ has zero advertising -- they don't even let their users advertise.

Video content nearly always has pre-roll video advertising -- those ads that play before the content you want to see starts playing. These have gotten longer and more intrusive over the past couple of years. It's not clear if that trend will continue.

AOL recently found in a commissioned study that short videos do a better job of selling products than longer ones.

Still, whether they keep getting longer or start getting shorter, video ads online are definitely going to become more common.

http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/microsoft-cheapens-windows-8-ads

Microsoft Cheapens Windows 8 with Ads

When Microsoft announced that virtually every single PC user on earth would be able to upgrade to Windows 8 for just $40, I cheered the company. But this low price is partially achieved by the bizarre addition of advertising in Windows 8, a move that I think cheapens the product.

If you accept a few banal ads in Windows 8 for $40, what would you accept in Windows 9 for $20? When does it stop? And why wouldn’t it get worse?

(And why Xbox LIVE Gold subscribers still see ads in the 360 is an insult I’ll never understand.)

There should be no ads in Windows 8. Period.

http://www.zdnet.com/how-outraged-should-you-be-about-ads-in-windows-8-apps-not-at-all-7000007223/

http://www.zdnet.com/big-brother-microsoft-listens-in-to-your-skype-ims-7000001495/

Big brother Microsoft listens in to your Skype IMs

Summary: Yes, Microsoft is recording, at the least, your Skype instant messages, and they have the potential to record your voice calls as well.
According to a Microsoft Skype spokesperson, “As was true before the Microsoft acquisition, Skype co-operates with law enforcement agencies as is legally required and technically feasible.”

Therefore, any person or business who is concerned with their communication privacy should stop using Skype and look for an alternative.

http://www.skype.com/intl/en-us/legal/privacy/general/#12

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/skype-jumps-the-shark-seven-alternative-voip-services/2488

Skype jumps the shark: Seven alternative VoIP services
Summary: Microsoft is adding advertising to its voice over IP (VoIP) service Skype. Fortunately, there are lots of alternatives that don't stick an ad in your face while you're talking.

Hundreds of millions of people use Skype for its free voice over IP (VoIP) services every day. Indeed, Skype claims that in March 2012, 35-million people were all talking at the same time on the service. But, how many of them are going to stick with it when Microsoft, Skype's owner, sticks ads in your face?

So, you should think of Conversation Ads as a way for Skype to generate fun interactivity between your circle of friends and family and the brands you care about." Oh yeah, I always like having an ad pop-up when I'm talking to a friend or co-worker.
These ads, which will use your location, age and sex to better target you, will appear on Skype for Windows if you don't have any Skype Credit or a Skype subscriptions while you're making 1:1 Skype-to-Skype audio calls.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/skype-leaking-user-ip-addresses-tcp-ports/11733

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/microsofts-ballmer-7-7-billion-skype-blunder/1033

http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/6E650B71-7375-45A6-8BB0-D105917549C3/

A COUPLE OF high profile advertising networks have been accused of letting a brand of malware slip through on their banner ads.

DoubleClick and rad.msn.com

don't go to this one for now as my Antivirus NOD32 say trojan.js
JS/Exploit.JavaDepkit.A trojan cornection terminated

htxxtp://blog(dot)armorize(dot)com/2010/12/hdd-plus-malware-spread-through.html

Rule for little text advertising under the "not available" text for expired giveaways:
giveawayoftheday.com##DIV[style="width: 100%; position: relative;"]

New rule for the Facebook Like button (it's a minor change):
giveawayoftheday.com##IFRAME[style="border: medium none; overflow: hidden; width: 400px; height: 80px;"]

Scratch the above. It screws up the GOTD home page. Instead, use:
giveawayoftheday.com##IFRAME[style="border: medium none; overflow: hidden; width: 450px; height: 80px;"]

In case you don't use Facebook and have no use for Like buttons...
giveawayoftheday.com##DIV[style="clear: both;"]

To block the latest Idea Informer:
giveawayoftheday.com##DIV[style="position: static; clear: both;"]

(Could a mod merge these posts?)

Meh. I still feel that ABP does the job well. IMO it's better to leave JS on rather than being paranoid as long as you watch where you're going.

Hi Bigun, actually, using NoScript does not forbid all "java-script-based" sites from using "java-script." The No-Script firefox add-on allows the user to designate which sites should (or should not) be blocked from implementing "java-script," so the user is in full control of training the "No-Script" add-on to behave as desired by the user. Please go back and read the "No-Script" guidance to verify this for yourself.

I read all and tried many of the above suggested ways of eliminating the pop-up from "informer.com".

I found at least one thing objectionable to each of the solutions that I tried. The solution that worked the best at eliminating the "informer.com" pop-up was using "NoScript". This solution requires using the Firefox browser with the "NoScript" add-on. The bad part of using this solution is that the solution eliminates all Java scripts on any website that uses JavaScript.

Ad Muncher is my favorite way of eliminating advertisements because it can be customized to fit all occasions. For some reason Ad Muncher failed to eliminate the GOTD pop up using its native filters. I wrote a filter that when used with Ad Muncher will eliminate the GOTD pop-up and leave other JavaScript applications untouched.

The following is what I used to eliminate the "informer.com" pop-up using the Ad Muncher application:

open Ad Muncher's configuration menu

click on "my filters" then click on the "add" button and type
the following (without the quotation marks) to the filter description:

" *.informer.com "

in the filter category type (without the quotation marks): " block retrieval of URL "

This fixed the problem for me. I made some other changes to Ad Muncher as well. If you find that the filter as I described it is not working, let me know and I will tell you the other changes that I made.

.

The problem with editing the hosts file is that it's not for the faint of heart. It's not foolproof, either. And it can't narrow down on individual addresses, just domains. And what if you got a local web server running on port 80? (And there's a reason that the file is in the drivers folder. Files from there is not for regular users to modify.)

I found that using "ADBLOCK Plus" with the filter:

|http://s.web.informer.com/*

Got rid of the damned cursed thing. All gone. Bye-bye.

Shame on GOTD leaving it's members to fend for themselves like
this and having to find out how to get rid of an intrusive and
annoying site feature. Why are you so silent?

copmom- I think the pop-ups can be toned down in the settings. Im just too lazy. but this site I have *only* giveawayoftheday.com allowed.

ummmm.. question! If I installed No Script in Firefox, would that stop java script from working? Several web sites require it be enabled so they work, such as PayPal!
--------------
edit: Never mind.. it explained my question.. but now I keep having a pop up box showing the No Script info. Grrrrrr.

Say, could someone merge the new rule with the rest of the others? Thanks.

yes, the default for noscript is forbid if not told to admit. but when I need the site to script i usually use the tempoary permission only, so it reverts.

FWIW, having an override on the color scheme causes more sites to mess up than noscript.

I have been using "Ad Muncher" several years on one of my computers. The product has been around for over ten years and I have seen a number of improvements during the time that I been using the program.

"Ad Muncher" is a very sophisticated and feature rich program. I use the default settings because I have seldom seen a reason to script customized filters. For those that enjoy using filters, you can fill an un-halting day on the Ad Muncher playground. Does it have proxies? Does it have proxies? - It has ooudolls.

"Ad Muncher" is not freeware and a license covers one computer. If you take advantage of the thirty day trial, and compare the results that you get with Ad Muncher with other ad and pop-up blocking programs, I am pretty sure that you'll end up purchasing Ad Muncher.

Ad Muncher comes in basic and professional versions. The basic version is updated on a weekly basis and the professional version is updated daily. Licensing agreements have changed several times during the time that I've been using the program. I guess that I should purchase a license for my second computer before another change in licensing occurs.

http://www.admuncher.com/

I agree about "NoScript" being effective (for sure) - but it then interferes with other operations that normally require scripts to run. Oh well, nothing's perfect I guess.

I still think noscript stomps the off-site-supplied adware easier.

Oh my god. Thank you so much. That crap almost had me vowing never to come back.

Pop-ups were a despicable practice 10 years ago; they aren't any better now. Sorry, GOTD: if you want to make money from ads, go ahead, that's cool, but don't interfere with my browsing. Any ad that actively interferes with my browsing gets blocked, period.

Thanks for the hints! I got it blocked with adblocker plus and noticed I had an error in my filter to block the stickr. I got that fixed and now I don't see hide nor hair of either!

Just today saw that hideous thing at bottom (before I came to this message board), and had to
add 'block retrieval of URL' [http://s.web.informer.com/] to admuncher. Now that's a lulu of an ad.

The rule to block the new Share button:
|http://s.web.informer.com/favorites-button.js

Actually, that's what I used in the first place. However, the helper can be a bit finicky, so it's the fastest if you enter the rules directly.

I use AdBlock+ Element Hiding Helper for Google Chrome. With that I don't have to enter in anything. I click the block button then on the page click what I want to hide and it hides it for me. Here's what GiveawayoftheDay looks like for me now.

It blocks, but the junk on the GOTD page isn't hidden (which means you can still see it). The point of this thread is to make it so you can't see it. It's impossible to not download the junk in the first place because it is a part of the entire page, and not an external resource.

what about my solution- does it simply hide or block dl?

A note: Adding these rules doesn't stop the filtered code from downloading, it's just not displayed.