| |||||||||||||
Blocking popups in FireFoxBlocking popups in FireFoxPosted Apr 7, 2005 23:08 UTC (Thu) by xtifr (subscriber, #143)Parent article: Blocking popups in FireFox
Another option that hasn't been mentioned is the "click-to-flash" extension, which prevents flash from starting unless and until the user clicks on the space where the flash would appear. The advantage to this is that it allows legitimate popups created by flash to still appear, while blocking the "sneaky" ones contained in ads - in fact, the flash ads go away completely. (Java popups are a separate problem, which I've solved by not installing java.)
With image animations disabled, and the click-to-flash extension installed, the WWW becomes a remarkably calm and peaceful place. I'm always appalled when I use someone else's machine, and see all these pages filled with annoying wiggling things trying to distract me from my reading, because it's not like that on my box! :)
(Log in to post comments)
Blocking popups in FireFox Posted Apr 8, 2005 6:18 UTC (Fri) by beejaybee (guest, #1581) [Link] If you're prepared to not install java, why not simply not install flash as well? In fact this is quite easy - AFAIK it's the default state even in Windows, though at least one major linux distribution does install flash by default. SuSe, take a bow.
I agree absolutely about distractions. Another sign of bad manners on behalf of those who wish to force us to pay attention to their tiny minds. We expect this from two year old children but not from the educated adults which advertising agencies and professional web design bureaux supposedly employ.
If social action to reduce these offences is going to have any effect at all, I think what we need to do is to compile "black lists" of sites and demand that ISPs block them on grounds of the offence they are causing (not to mention bandwidth congestion etc.) At least some ISPs seem to be prepared to block kiddie porn content (returning "page not found" instead of "content blocked" in the case of BT) - with the blessing of at least one national government - so why shouldn't offensive advertising be attacked by the same mechanism?
Mandatory filtering Posted Apr 11, 2005 18:33 UTC (Mon) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link] If social action to reduce these offenses is going to have any effect at all, I think what we need to do is to compile "black lists" of sites and demand that ISPs block them [....] At least some ISPs seem to be prepared to block [...] content [...] with the blessing of at least one national government - so why shouldn't offensive advertising be attacked by the same mechanism? (Yes, I cut out the ``but it's to protect the children'' bits, because filtering kiddie porn is a riddled with false positives and false negatives as any other filtering regime.) Erm, because all I demand of an ISP is to send bytes I generate, and accept bytes I receive. Period. And I really don't want my government (or anyone else) controlling what I can see. I want raw, unadulterated bits in both directions. If some folks want filtering, let them opt in to it. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure where mandatory filtering leads. (I live in the U.S. of A., so this isn't a tin-foil-hat issue; we're already fighting for freedom of speech, electronic and otherwise.)
Blocking popups in FireFox Posted Apr 19, 2005 4:41 UTC (Tue) by beoba (guest, #16942) [Link] While I have Java installed, I keep it disabled in the preferences (under Features). If I visit a site that I need it for (the occasional science demo comes to mind), then I manually enable it temporarily. Would be neat if there was an extension with a fast toggle out there, though.
|
|||||||||||||