Skip to main content


Installing an adblocker is the gateway drug into anti-consumerism, which is in turn the gateway drug into anti-capitalism.

Tell all your friends how to install adblockers.

in reply to My First Nightjar

One of the things we did for TROMjaro tromjaro.com/ , our custom Linux distro, is to pack Firefox with adblockers and tracker blockers and such. Plus github.com/libredirect/libredi… so you can redirect popular websites to their "trade-free" alternatives (where you don't have to trade your data or attention). And at first I did this because I wanted my parents to stay away from the pesky world of ads and data mining.
in reply to Camel

Advertising is immoral.
The idea of pushing information by throwing money at it is immoral. It is a form of corruption. Valuable information flows by itself, without sponsors, ads, product placements and all the other alternative forms of shitting-in-your-head.
in reply to My First Nightjar

adblockers are killing the online surveillance industry! And it’s fun

reshared this

Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
My First Nightjar
what? I have never heard of an adblocker that you have to pay for. Just use ublock origin
Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
My First Nightjar
what is wrong with Ublock Origin specifically? I'd like to know because I'm relying on it
Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
My First Nightjar
what? are you honestly saying open source software is less safe than proprietary software?
Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
My First Nightjar
open source doesn't mean everyone can go in, edit the code and introduce malicious bits of code. You can fork it, but you have to release it as a different software under a different name, and nobody is gonna install that.
Since the source code is open and typically there are many independent contributors to a project, each one of them can take a look at it and spot bugs or malicious bits of code and remove them. This is not true for proprietary software, so generally speaking, open source software is a lot safer than proprietary.
Though of course other aspects play an important role as well, such as corporate interest, how many people actually look at the code, how the review process is handled and so on
Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
My First Nightjar
yeah, that's FUD pushed by companies such as microsoft and google. Don't believe a word they say
Unknown parent

friendica - Link to source
Till

@Edwin🌸🙀 @Descentury's bass player

Most of the android system is open source and I to my knowledge, there is no browser left, that isn't at least partially open source. If you try to avoid open source, you can't browse the internet.

Unknown parent

mastodon - Link to source
My First Nightjar
Idk, it still makes absolutely no sense to me
Unknown parent

friendica - Link to source
Till

@Edwin🌸🙀 @Descentury's bass player

Open Source makes it a little easier for everyone to spot vulnerabilities. But closed source doesn't make it impossible, only a little bit harder. Bad actors still easily find security holes in closed source.

As a result, you have more good actors looking for security holes (and bugs) in open source software. Also, if a good actor finds a vulnerability or a bug, in open source software, they often just send a fix together with the report. In proprietary software, they can only report the vulnerability and hope for the best. Security holes in proprietary software have been known to be open for years, just because the maintainers didn't want to spent the money/time to fix it.

in reply to My First Nightjar

Some news sites don't let you read articles unless you disable ad blocker. :(
⇧