It garbles advertisers’ data as a result, but you must disable uBlock Origin to run it; they can’t work simultaneously. I recently moved to it and, so far, am never looking back!
You know this is the good shit because when it first came out a few years back google was running a huge disinformation campaign against it. You’d search for “adnauseum” in google and the first result would be an article from some weird advertising company calling is “insecure” and “malware” without any actual argumentation behind those claims, while no other search engine returned that article (I lost the screenshots, so yall are just gonna have to take my word for it). They also delisted it from the chrome store for not discernible reason. They were afraid.
But nowadays I’m willing to bet that they figured out how to detect adnauseum’s fake clicks and filtering it out. Stuff like that needs a talented development team to keep it up to date.
Has the same limitations as uBlock Origin with Manifest v3 and won’t work in Chrome.
If you’re still using chrome at this point that’s on you.
I use Librewolf. The comment was meant as info for those who think that having uBlock as a base still holds significance in light of Manifest v3.
I meant the general “you.” “People” would have worked.
Or a Chrome derivative
The solution is simple. Chrome ditches manifest v2? Ditch Chrome.
It’s not even available on chrome because google removed it years ago. They weren’t breaking any rules, but google saw it as a threat and kept it removed since there wasn’t sufficient backlash.
Really wish people would STFU about the “privacy” aspect about this. It gives junk data to trackers because it floods them with all the ads you’re coming across. The main purpose, though, is to charge advertisers money without giving them a service in return.
It’s sad most of you consumers can’t see the real significance of this software, but it really puts into perspective why most people are useful idiots these days.
Consumerism has won.
You could try being just a little optimistic if you want to sell your actually good points. Consumerism wins when you let it, and the only way to judge when it has are by your own merits, even now it gets to you with that mindset.
It’s not even available on chrome because google removed it years ago.
They weren’t breaking any rules, but google saw it as a threat and kept it removed since there wasn’t sufficient backlash.
Really wish people would STFU about the “privacy” aspect about this. It gives junk data to trackers because it floods them with all the ads you’re coming across. The main purpose, though, is to charge advertisers money without giving them a service in return.
It’s sad most of you consumers can’t see the real significance of this software, but it really puts into perspective why most people are useful idiots these days.
Consumerism has won.
I always liked using this on the premise of privacy-through-obfuscation. If the powers that be must get information from me, then i’d prefer to give them garbage information.
Exactly. You can’t completely avoid being tracked but you can ensure that your profile is just noise without any value to advertisers
I always like this on the premise of charging advertisers money while giving them no audience in return.
And lots of it.
Couple of issues I’m wondering about…
First, wouldn’t clicking on everything just make you easier to track?
Second, how much bandwidth would all this use?
- not in this way
- not enough to matter
the way it works is sending an HTTP request that registers as a “click” to the advertiser (thus costing them money), but then doesn’t actually let the browser download any content and fetch the webpage, basically pi-holes the destination site and any attached tracking cookies. Combined with the fact that it does this to every ad, it would basically poison any click tracking.
edit: pedants
and before I get any more of you, this is just what I remember reading about adnauseam, do not take it as gospel, go look at AdNauseam’s FAQ.
Thanks for doing your part to spread the truth in this sea of lies and FUD.
It’s clear that most people these days are proud consumers with more money than sense. All they care about is looking good in front of their consumerist friends, and they base all of their actions and decisions around what will support that ideology.
As a kid, I thought useful idiots were rare. Now I see it’s the exact opposite.
none
Ah great
it works [by] sending an HTTP request that registers as a “click” to the advertiser
Uh, wait a minute. 🤔
Sending a request also uses bandwidth, you know.
A basic GET request, even with a long querystring, will be negligible even on a 1998 dial-up connection.
Right, but thousands of them, possibly every day? Could perhaps affect your data consumption on your phone e.g. 🤷♂️
Edit: I got it guys, thanks.
You aren’t terribly familiar with how much traffic we generate nowadays… are you? If we were still on 2G and isdn / dsl sure. You’d likely see a slight latency jump. On anything from this last decade+ ? Not a chance.
I’m not, am I. I hadn’t done any calculations regarding this. It was strictly hypothetical, as you can probably tell from the question mark and 🤷♂️. 👍
I’ll be honest - you weren’t really presenting your case in that way. Understand my confusion: you seemed pretty adamant about your concern with no backing data on it. Most people pick their hills with something to back them.
I don’t know of any data plan that limits on the upload. Caps are usually on the download side, and TFA says it does not download the server response.
Okay, fine, not enough to matter. Are you satisfied with that?
“I have drawn YOU as the soyjack and ME as the chad, therefore you lose the argument”
Are you autistic?
Yeah.
Is that a fucking problem?
It is when you’re being rude for no reason.
Using autistic as a derogatory slur is rude for no reason.
what a rude thing to say, especially considering I wasn’t talking to you.
I’m gonna keep it that way, best of luck baiting someone else champ.
I mean, that image is pretty rude, too.
Jesus, you got defensive quick and hard. Sorry I rustled you.
https://lemmy.world/comment/16187642
🤷♂️
furthermore: lmao.
you’ve got to try a lot harder to “rustle” me, but I like your moxie for thinking you did, sport
doing the math, even the cheapest phone plans that don’t explicitly exclude data, nowadays include at least 1GB of data for free. Usually more. Almost any reachable amount of outbound requests to click on ads would barely put a dent in your data allowance.
Now the name calling. Cool, dude.
I’ll concede the data plan dent thing; I hadn’t done any math regarding that. Thanks for clarifying that to me and everyone else!
But you did say “none” so I just pointed out the fact that it’s not none. It’s some. I wasn’t wrong to point that out. No matter how much of a stickler you find me for that.
But that’s no reason to post images implicitly depicting me to be some kind of fat nerd.
You’re a rude person. Autistic or not.
I’ll concede the data plan dent thing; I hadn’t done any math regarding that. Thanks for clarifying that to me and everyone else!
I accept your concession, better luck next time.
But you did say “none” so I just pointed out the fact that it’s not none. It’s some. I wasn’t wrong to point that out. No matter how much of a stickler you find me for that.
pedantry is pedantry, if you interject with “well ACKSHUALLY” over literally a couple kilobytes of data in this, the Year Of Our Lord 2025 where common storage device sizes are in the multiple terabyte range, and 100mbps down/10 up is exceedingly common, expect to be called one. It is functionally none, because it is not 1993.
Autistic or not.
can’t even come up with your own insult for me, just gonna steal that sad attempt at bait from the other guy? how… underwhelming, must do better. 🤡
You definitely seem rustled.
That HTTP request would also show up in the advertisers web logs with your origin IP address.
I think we’re far past caring about a website logging an IP address.
I’m past caring about giving my IP to a website that I want to use, but what this is doing is handing out your information to every single advertiser that is published on any page you visit. In some cases this plugin would match the definition of “leaking personal data”.
You do you though. I won’t stop you.
Most people dont have static IPs. All the ads would see is web requests from random residential ips from a certain country.
I don’t know about NZ (or wherever you are), but IP addresses for residential access in the US don’t really change all that much. It’s… concerning.
Google has put a lot of effort into detecting and blocking stuff like this. They call it “click fraud”, if you want to look it up.
It’ll just mean they start ignoring clicks from you.
That, I guess, it’s the whole point. Stopping being tracked 🙂
if enough people start doing it might be effective
Not sure how true it was, but there was a YouTuber claiming that their videos were getting entirely demonetized because too many of their viewers had Ad blockers enabled. So even though 75% of people were seeing ads on the video, Google was keeping that ad revenue, withholding it all from the creator because 25% weren’t getting ads. The claim the youtuber made is that this will probably predominantly impact creators with a more tech savvy / privacy aware audience, resulting in less of that niche content.
Anyway, this is anecdotal, but I wouldn’t put it past Google to pass the issue to the creators for the actions of their consumers, even though it’s not their fault.
google has way too much power. its threat to everything
Creators who care about privacy should not support Google’s monopoly by using YouTube as their platform of choice.
I don’t know, just sounds like I’d be contributing to the marketers metrics so they can show “it works”. it’ll only make them invest in ads more. if anyone thinks capitalists are these genius level manipulators who know how everything works I only refer to the richest person alive being the least charismatic, least knowledgable, unfuckable troglodyte who keeps making an ass of himself.
if any of these companies suffer any losses or reduced profits they’ll just fire hardworking people, not one of them will turn around and say maybe the ads aren’t working when you actively work to show them that it is working.
… until they keep having to dismiss people and go, “… huh.” This is a marathon we’re playing. You certainly don’t have to use it, but I think the philosophy makes sense, especially given how AdNauseam doesn’t click on acceptable ads that don’t track you.
they will never go “huh”. you give way too much credit to corporate management.
I’ve been recommending this for awhile, it’s nice to see someone else take up the mantle.
Yes, it clicks ads in addition to blocking them. Google removed it from its addon repository even though it wasn’t breaking any rules. They just removed it and kept it removed because there wasn’t sufficient backlash, the scumbags.
It’s the main reason why I use Firefox these days. it’s clear that the cabal will not allow anything that legitimately threatens their power structure, and make advertising less-effective for the same price is a gut punch they need.
Interesting, was wondering about this. This would also “help” the websites with more ad income right?
if thats true, brb setting up a website and a bot farm
Careful: that then enters the world of ad fraud, which randos like us doing the clicking isn’t considered as.
Good start. Now make a version that clicks each ad a random number of times from randomly generated IP addresses.
That’s not how IP addresses work.
You can fake your IP. There isnt really any authentication at the IP level. Just make a packet and overwite the IP field.
Edit: I was corrected. The TCP handshake requires you to have a valid IP you can respond from. So even though you can fake your IP, you can’t use that to talk to most websites.
You need a TCP handshake prior to sending any http payload.
Oh yeah. Forgot about that.
What if we use a Visual Basic UI to hack the IP address by netmask?
Yes, but this only works if you connect your VPN via 3 block chain proxies.
Nothing is random
In bot cases like this you would have a proxy list that it “randomly” picks from
No, he means that’s literally not how IP addresses work. It’s not about “nothing being random.”
You don’t just “pick an IP address” from a list lmao and send it as though it’s not your actual IP. You would need to literally connect to a proxy and send the request through that proxy in order for ads to see an IP different than you own.
My god, are you people trolls or just the next generation taking hold? The dumbing down of Western society is in full force.
You would need to literally connect to a proxy and send the request through that proxy in order for ads to see an IP different than you own.
Yes that is what was proposed, you’re the only one who seems unclear on it
Where is it being proposed?
I said the end goal in my top level comment. I didn’t go into methodology because I figured someone else could do it more eloquently; thank you for doing so.
