+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.li)
+-- Forum: General (https://sinister.li/Forum-General)
+--- Forum: World News (https://sinister.li/Forum-World-News)
+--- Thread: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads (/Thread-Google-Chrome-bypassing-Adblock-forces-users-to-watch-full-length-video-ads)
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - Uzinero - 09-09-2015
Yet another reason I'm part of the #FirefoxMasterRace.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - mothered - 09-09-2015
I simply have multiple tabs open with videos I plan to watch. I start each one jumping from one tab to the next, mute them along the way (so I don't hear or see the ads), and by the time I go back to the original one, the ad has finished.
I pause and watch the rest thereafter on the same grounds.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - DarkKnight - 09-09-2015
(09-09-2015, 02:02 AM)Uzinero Wrote: Yet another reason I'm part of the #FirefoxMasterRace.
#firefoxforlife mate.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - Soap - 09-09-2015
(09-09-2015, 12:20 PM)mothered Wrote: ..
So what's the reason you're not using adblocking extensions?
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - Coca. - 09-10-2015
Google makes a lot of money from their YouTube advertisements, and if I owned a company with high-paying video advertisements and lost most of that money because of an ad-blocker, I'd probably try to get rid of it, too, honestly. I don't blame them for that.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - mothered - 09-10-2015
(09-09-2015, 04:54 PM)Soap Wrote: So what's the reason you're not using adblocking extensions?
Given you're banned, you obviously can't respond to this, but I'll post my thoughts for the rest of the community to view.
Depending on the nature of a given extension, It will consume memory/ram and/or CPU to a certain degree. Whilst Adblock does serve It's objective, It does chew ram In doing so. I have over 25 tabs open at any given time, so assuming Adblock Is consuming 40MB per webpage (tab) of available/free ram, that's 1GB of ram utilized simply by an extension.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - blackhatcat - 09-10-2015
(09-10-2015, 12:05 PM)mothered Wrote: Given you're banned, you obviously can't respond to this, but I'll post my thoughts for the rest of the community to view.
Depending on the nature of a given extension, It will consume memory/ram and/or CPU to a certain degree. Whilst Adblock does serve It's objective, It does chew ram In doing so. I have over 25 tabs open at any given time, so assuming Adblock Is consuming 40MB per webpage (tab) of available/free ram, that's 1GB of ram utilized simply by an extension.
In what universe does adblock use 40MB ram per tab? If you're going to be using an ad blocker get ublock origin as it has been proven to be faster and memory efficient if that matters to you. It's 2015 but people are still caring about something using too much ram?
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - Soap - 09-11-2015
Are you saying your machine is not powerful enough to run adblocking software? uBlock Origins uses almost nothing.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - mothered - 09-11-2015
(09-10-2015, 03:47 PM)blackhatcat Wrote: In what universe does adblock use 40MB ram per tab? If you're going to be using an ad blocker get ublock origin as it has been proven to be faster and memory efficient if that matters to you. It's 2015 but people are still caring about something using too much ram?
Evidently you're basing your statement on a simple Google search.
Here's my Independent tests conducted over a year ago. On one tab (Iframes Inclusive), It consumed 80MB of ram.
Adblock Plus disabled:
![[Image: 2jdkz9x.png]](http://i57.tinypic.com/2jdkz9x.png)
Adblock Plus enabled:
![[Image: x6bo9.jpg]](http://i62.tinypic.com/x6bo9.jpg)
Pertaining to using too much Ram, are you saying that even with "memory leaks" (also exhausting virtual memory/page file due to Insufficient ram), thus causing significant system Instability and/or loss of functionality Is fine? Of course Ram Is an Issue. It's not only running applications that are of concern, but also the "nature" of applications.
Furthermore, It all depends on NOT the physically Installed Ram, but more so the "available/free" Ram. If I only had 2GB of Ram and due to running applications and/or VMs etc was only left with 800MB of available/free Ram, then yes, It Is of concern If I were to opt for the Implementation of Adblock.
RE: Google Chrome bypassing Adblock, forces users to watch full-length video ads - Oni - 09-11-2015
(09-11-2015, 03:01 PM)mothered Wrote: Evidently you're basing your statement on a simple Google search.
Here's my Independent tests conducted over a year ago. On one tab (Iframes Inclusive), It consumed 80MB of ram.
Adblock Plus disabled:
Adblock Plus enabled:
Pertaining to using too much Ram, are you saying that even with "memory leaks" (also exhausting virtual memory/page file due to Insufficient ram), thus causing significant system Instability and/or loss of functionality Is fine? Of course Ram Is an Issue. It's not only running applications that are of concern, but also the "nature" of applications.
Furthermore, It all depends on NOT the physically Installed Ram, but more so the "available/free" Ram. If I only had 2GB of Ram and due to running applications and/or VMs etc was only left with 800MB of available/free Ram, then yes, It Is of concern If I were to opt for the Implementation of Adblock.
With just a tab open, my Firefox uses 300mb+ of RAM. Keep in mind, I have a few other addons. I don't find 1gb to be too much, as I have 16gb. I personally think it should use less, though.