Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Sep 2012 23:28 UTC, submitted by Hiev
Google "I was recently testing some of the keywords and positions for our help-desk app and it suddenly occurred to me that 80% of the page were not actually the search results. Check this out." He has a very good point. Google has work to do here.
Thread beginning with comment 534057
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Where?
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 6th Sep 2012 08:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Where?"
UltraZelda64
Member since:
2006-12-05

I'm surprised nobody has crapped their pants yet and gone on about how you're so "selfish" for using ad-blockers.

Me too... I was fully expecting it, as well as being down-modded to oblivion. I bet they'll eventually arrive, though. Topics like these, about advertising and ad blocking, never fail to attract people who are for whatever reason completely against the concept of blocking nuisances including advertisements.

Edited 2012-09-06 08:59 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Where?
by WereCatf on Thu 6th Sep 2012 09:08 in reply to "RE[2]: Where?"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Me too... I was fully expecting it, as well as being down-modded to oblivion. I bet they'll eventually arrive, though. Topics like these, about advertising and ad blocking, never fail to attract people who are for whatever reason completely against the concept of blocking nuisances including advertisements.


Often blocking ads is not only about convenience, but also about security; most Joes and Janes do insist on keeping Flash installed so installing AdBlock for them gets rid of ads and at the same time drastically reduces the chances for them to receive a drive-by malware-injection via a vulnerability in Flash.

Sure, it is a loss in profits for the party that is running those ads, but the increase in security is significant enough to warrant that.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Where?
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 6th Sep 2012 20:09 in reply to "RE[3]: Where?"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Yep. True. As yet another side effect, running NoScript drastically reduces the amount of memory wasted on unwanted garbage. Minimal or no javascript or any other scripting leads to much less memory consumed on stuff that would be better used on loading the actual pages you want to read. When you've got my problem (not enough memory for the number of tabs you typically have open), this can delay the inevitable swapping for a while. I noticed that many major news sites are bad for this, and of all the sites I visit Slashdot is probably the biggest offender... but it relies so much on javascript it's not really a good idea to keep it disabled on that site. /. is the main exception I can think of.

Edited 2012-09-06 20:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2