Hank Rogers wrote:

>>> As a side note, I tried a different hosts file since the mvps file
>>> doesn't appear to be being updated. Big mistake.
>>
>> yes it is a mistake to use a hosts file when far better options exist.
>>
>
> I didn't realize you can even use a hosts file on an iphone.
>
> How does that work?
>
> I might want to try for the hell of it.

You're probably asking nospam to back up his claim but he won't be able to
because he made it up. He'll try to deflect the question using an insult.

Meanwhile, on Android, you can use any ad-blocking hosts file you want.
Without being root.
For free.

https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/blob/master/ADBLOCKING.md

On 2023-02-08 15:25, Nic wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote:
>
>>>> As a side note, I tried a different hosts file since the mvps file
>>>> doesn't appear to be being updated. Big mistake.
>>>
>>> yes it is a mistake to use a hosts file when far better options exist.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't realize you can even use a hosts file on an iphone.
>>
>> How does that work?
>>
>> I might want to try for the hell of it.
>
> You're probably asking nospam to back up his claim but he won't be able to
> because he made it up. He'll try to deflect the question using an insult.
>
> Meanwhile, on Android, you can use any ad-blocking hosts file you want.
> Without being root.
> For free.
>
> https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/blob/master/ADBLOCKING.md

<https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047223162#?platform=ipad>

Want more?

In article <F3WEL.125235$5S78.33589@fx48.iad>, Hank Rogers
<hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> >> As a side note, I tried a different hosts file since the mvps file
> >> doesn't appear to be being updated. Big mistake.
> >
> > yes it is a mistake to use a hosts file when far better options exist.
> >
>
> I didn't realize you can even use a hosts file on an iphone.

not directly, not that it matters since a hosts file an obsolete method
with many downsides.

as i said, much better options exist. one example are content blockers,
which can eve work when ads are served from the same domain as is the
content (e.g., youtube). another example are dns blackholes, such as a
pihole and its equivalents, which can work across an entire lan rather
than only one device. both of those are continually updated with new
domains (manual or automatic) as well as supporting wildcards and
groups.

In article <ts1aot$p4s3$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli
<nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

> 1. Tell us how to completely remove the advertising ID on iOS

<https://discussions.apple.com/thread/252254878>
...Go to Settings/Privacy and scroll to the bottom. If you turn off
Personalized Ads your phone will never send an advertising identifier.

> 2. Tell us the app to download that watches YouTube without ads

safari. no need to even download it.

alternately, other browsers can be used.

> 3. Tell us the app to download that loads any ad-blocking host file,

a hosts file is an obsolete and not particularly effective method to
block ads (which explains why you're fixated on it).

On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 14:45:14 -0500, Alan Browne
<bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:

>On 2023-02-07 14:41, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 2/7/23 10:49 AM, RonTheGuy wrote:
>>> On Feb 07, 2023, Alan Browne wrote
>>> (in article<news:OLvEL.71818$jiuc.36142@fx44.iad>):
>>>
>>>>> Where do those ads go though?
>>>>> They're not sent into the gmail email account itself, are they?
>>>>
>>>> Google stopped this practice long ago.  They get data on people
>>>> elsewise - in large part from companies that sell their data about
>>>> you to them via various aggregators.
>>>
>>> Thanks for letting me know Google stopped scanning the email for
>>> things to
>>> send you ads about but where do those ads you spoke about show up?
>>>
>>> I see some ads when I browse the web. Is it there?
>>> There are some ads that I see when I use some apps. Is it there?
>>
>> No idea.  I use adblock plus, ublock origin and a hosts file.  The only
>> ads I see are the ones youtube forces you to watch for a few seconds
>> before they let you click SKIP.  I have also trained my mind to not
>> actually see ads -- billboards, etc.
>
>There is a YT ad blocker.
>
>>
>>> How do I know if an ad is a targeted ad from Google or just random?
>>
>> I don't understand why people don't use adblockers.  Can you explain?
>
>Some sites require you remove the adblocker to see them. Some are even
>worth it - at least temporarily.

Maybe some are worth it, but I've never run across one. I never
disable mine.

On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 08:37:21 -0800, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 2/7/2023 11:41 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> I don't understand why people don't use adblockers.  Can you explain?
>
>What makes you believe that most people don't use Ad Blockers? I think
>that most people don't use hosts files and have no idea what they are.
>Thanks for reminding me to update my hosts file using the text file from
><https://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm>.

You can't. It hasn't been updated since March 2021.

In article <nle8uhtkh7s0borj5ou5151bdagqbk8o34@4ax.com>, Ken Blake
<Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:

> >
> >Some sites require you remove the adblocker to see them. Some are even
> >worth it - at least temporarily.
>
>
> Maybe some are worth it, but I've never run across one. I never
> disable mine.

forbes used to block ad blockers, but they no longer do. they must have
noticed people weren't disabling them and going elsewhere.

On 2/8/23 1:14 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-02-08 21:33, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 2/8/23 8:37 AM, sms wrote:
>>> On 2/7/2023 11:41 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> I don't understand why people don't use adblockers.  Can you explain?
>>>
>>> What makes you believe that most people don't use Ad Blockers?
>>
>> They complain about ads.  QED!  No idea about the proportion, but there
>> seem to be quite a few of them.
>>
>>>  I think that most people don't use hosts files and have no idea what
>>> they are.
>>> Thanks for reminding me to update my hosts file using the text file from
>>> <https://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm>.
>>
>> I think you're correct here.  I can't remember where I downloaded my
>> huge one, but I also have a bigger hosts.deny from
>> https://github.com/Ultimate-Hosts-Blacklist/Ultimate.Hosts.Blacklist
>>
>> Belt and suspenders...
>
> I think you need to keep the file updated frequently.
>
>>
>>> One nice thing I've noticed recently is that many web sites that
>>> complain about ad blockers now have an option to "continue with out
>>> unblocking" in small print, below where they ask you to unblock ads. I
>>> think that it's because even without ads they benefit from you visiting
>>> their site since there are often affiliate links that could be clicked
>>> on, and they realized that most people would not unblock ads to continue
>>> to their site.
>>
>> I've seen some 'continue' notes in small print at sites that want you to
>> subscribe.  Drudge frequently points to articles in newspapers that
>> demand a subscription before they let you see the article.  They
>> actually think that Kalifornians and other out-of-staters are willing to
>> subscribe to the East Podunk Journal?
>
> Or Spaniards :-D

Those too :-)

I was looking at android adblockers earlier today. A number of them
contained in-app ads and some said they shared the user's info with
third parties. Made me feel a bit uneasy...

--
Cheers, Bev
"When your enemies are making mistakes, don't interrupt them."
-- from the film 'Moneyball'

Nic wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote:
>
>>>> As a side note, I tried a different hosts file since the mvps file
>>>> doesn't appear to be being updated. Big mistake.
>>>
>>> yes it is a mistake to use a hosts file when far better options exist.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't realize you can even use a hosts file on an iphone.
>>
>> How does that work?
>>
>> I might want to try for the hell of it.
>
> You're probably asking nospam

Sometimes he answers a question. Give him a chance.

On 2/8/2023 3:25 PM, Nic wrote:
> Hank Rogers wrote:
>
>>>> As a side note, I tried a different hosts file since the mvps file
>>>> doesn't appear to be being updated. Big mistake.
>>>
>>> yes it is a mistake to use a hosts file when far better options exist.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't realize you can even use a hosts file on an iphone.
>>
>> How does that work?
>>
>> I might want to try for the hell of it.
>
> You're probably asking nospam to back up his claim but he won't be able to
> because he made it up. He'll try to deflect the question using an insult.
>
> Meanwhile, on Android, you can use any ad-blocking hosts file you want.
> Without being root.
> For free.
>
> https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/blob/master/ADBLOCKING.md

Netguard is not really the same as using a hosts file on the actual
device though it achieves the same result, without rooting. And you can
do the same sort of thing on non-jailbroken iOS devices with a similar app.

On a rooted Android device it's easy to edit the hosts file, see
<https://www.techrepublic.com/article/edit-your-rooted-android-hosts-file-to-block-ad-servers/>

On a non-rooted Android device you can use Netguard's VPN service to
essentially do the same thing, see
<
https://android.gadgethacks.com/how-to/enable-netguards-hidden-ad-blocking-feature-your-android-phone-0176386/>.

On a jail-broken iPhone you can edit the hosts file (located at
/private/etc/hosts).

On a non-jail-broken iPhone you can use an app like AdGuard Pro to
achieve essentially the same result as Netguard (see
https://adguard.com/en/blog/how-to-configure-system-wide-blocking.html
for an explanation of how it works, it's $9.99 from
<https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-pro-adblock-privacy/id1126386264>).
Not free, but not a recurring monthly charge.

A hosts file is a much better solution than Netguard or AdGuard Pro but
most people won't root or jailbreak their devices and for obvious
reasons the operating system manufacturers don't want you to be easily
able to block advertising by modifying the hosts file.

On 2/8/2023 4:14 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

<snip>

> Maybe some are worth it, but I've never run across one. I never
> disable mine.

Within the past few months I've noticed that a lot of sites will ask you
to disable ad-blocking but then, in a small font, there will be an
option "Continue without disabling ad-blocking" or "Continue without
supporting us."

I have disabled ad-blocking for a site that I really want to view, but
it's rare.

In article <ts1i81$dqe4$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Netguard is not really the same as using a hosts file on the actual
> device though it achieves the same result, without rooting.

the mechanism isn't the same, but the results are, which is what
matters.

>
> On a non-jail-broken iPhone you can use an app like AdGuard Pro to
> achieve essentially the same result as Netguard

a content blocker is not the same thing as a hosts file, and there are
other options that provide the same result.

> A hosts file is a much better solution than Netguard or AdGuard Pro

no it very definitely isn't, for all sorts of reasons.

> but
> most people won't root or jailbreak their devices and for obvious
> reasons the operating system manufacturers don't want you to be easily
> able to block advertising by modifying the hosts file.

no, thats not why.

the reason is that it is a major security hole. a nefarious app could
hijack network queries.

On 2/8/2023 12:33 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

<snip>

> I've seen some 'continue' notes in small print at sites that want you to
> subscribe.  Drudge frequently points to articles in newspapers that
> demand a subscription before they let you see the article.  They
> actually think that Kalifornians and other out-of-staters are willing to
> subscribe to the East Podunk Journal?

My local public library gives online access to a lot of national
newspapers that would otherwise be behind a paywall. These include the
New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Wall Street Journal,
though not the Washington Post. They also have a great many foreign
newspapers available to read at no charge, as well as a lot of magazines.

If Apple News+ were available on non-Apple devices I would subscribe to
the Apple One Family plan, but when Apple purchased Texture they dropped
support for Windows and Android. I'd use Apple Music, Apple Fitness+ as
well, though not really interested in Apple TV+.

Am 09.02.23 um 01:19 schrieb nospam:
> In article <nle8uhtkh7s0borj5ou5151bdagqbk8o34@4ax.com>, Ken Blake
> <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Some sites require you remove the adblocker to see them. Some are even
>>> worth it - at least temporarily.
>>
>>
>> Maybe some are worth it, but I've never run across one. I never
>> disable mine.
>
> forbes used to block ad blockers, but they no longer do. they must have
> noticed people weren't disabling them and going elsewhere.

Aha. Adblocking is a passive process. Forbes can recognise that they are
unable to deliver ads and scripts but they are not able to disable a
blocker at the receiver end.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 2023-02-09 02:32, sms wrote:
> On 2/8/2023 4:14 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Maybe some are worth it, but I've never run across one. I never
>> disable mine.
>
> Within the past few months I've noticed that a lot of sites will ask you
> to disable ad-blocking but then, in a small font, there will be an
> option "Continue without disabling ad-blocking" or "Continue without
> supporting us."

I have not noticed, but I'll look next time.

> I have disabled ad-blocking for a site that I really want to view, but
> it's rare.

Me too. I may also have disabled it for a site I /needed/ to open.
Sometimes a site may not ask to disable it, but doesn't work right.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2023-02-09 01:29, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 2/8/23 1:14 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2023-02-08 21:33, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 2/8/23 8:37 AM, sms wrote:
>>>> On 2/7/2023 11:41 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> I don't understand why people don't use adblockers.  Can you explain?
>>>>
>>>> What makes you believe that most people don't use Ad Blockers?
>>>
>>> They complain about ads.  QED!  No idea about the proportion, but
>>> there seem to be quite a few of them.
>>>
>>>>  I think that most people don't use hosts files and have no idea
>>>> what they are.
>>>> Thanks for reminding me to update my hosts file using the text file
>>>> from
>>>> <https://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm>.
>>>
>>> I think you're correct here.  I can't remember where I downloaded my
>>> huge one, but I also have a bigger hosts.deny from
>>> https://github.com/Ultimate-Hosts-Blacklist/Ultimate.Hosts.Blacklist
>>>
>>> Belt and suspenders...
>>
>> I think you need to keep the file updated frequently.
>>
>>>
>>>> One nice thing I've noticed recently is that many web sites that
>>>> complain about ad blockers now have an option to "continue with out
>>>> unblocking" in small print, below where they ask you to unblock ads. I
>>>> think that it's because even without ads they benefit from you visiting
>>>> their site since there are often affiliate links that could be clicked
>>>> on, and they realized that most people would not unblock ads to
>>>> continue
>>>> to their site.
>>>
>>> I've seen some 'continue' notes in small print at sites that want you
>>> to subscribe.  Drudge frequently points to articles in newspapers
>>> that demand a subscription before they let you see the article.  They
>>> actually think that Kalifornians and other out-of-staters are willing
>>> to subscribe to the East Podunk Journal?
>>
>> Or Spaniards :-D
>
> Those too :-)
>
> I was looking at android adblockers earlier today.  A number of them
> contained in-app ads and some said they shared the user's info with
> third parties.  Made me feel a bit uneasy...

Quite.

I use an addblocker on my computers, but not yet on my phone/tablet.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Am 09.02.23 um 11:27 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
> I use an addblocker on my computers, but not yet on my phone/tablet.

On my Pixel I use FF as standard browser. There can be easily adblockers
added. What I do not want to do is to install another browser.

NoScript and uBlock Origin among a lot of other addons are available.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Hank Rogers wrote:

> Sometimes he answers a question. Give him a chance.

I'm sure you realize nospam made it up because he doesn't actually know.
Why should nospam look anything up if he can just lie about iOS?

He'll deflect by insulting, claiming nobody wants it, saying it's already
there, saying that Apple does everything better than how you want it, etc.

Consider the logic.
If nospam knew anything about iOS he wouldn't have to always lie about it.

On 2/8/2023 7:29 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> I was looking at android adblockers earlier today. A number of them
> contained in-app ads and some said they shared the user's info with
> third parties. Made me feel a bit uneasy..

WTF?

That's like saying "I was looking at people earlier today. A number of them
had tattoos and some looked like they had shared a prison cell. Made me
feel a bit uneasy..".

Anyone can find lousy people & then claim because they don't know how to
find good people, they unilaterally decreed that all people are lousy.

Change "people" to "apps" and that's what you just said.
--
best regards,

Neil

On 2023-02-09, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <nle8uhtkh7s0borj5ou5151bdagqbk8o34@4ax.com>, Ken Blake
><Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>> >Some sites require you remove the adblocker to see them. Some are
>> >even worth it - at least temporarily.
>>
>> Maybe some are worth it, but I've never run across one. I never
>> disable mine.
>
> forbes used to block ad blockers, but they no longer do. they must
> have noticed people weren't disabling them and going elsewhere.

Still not interested. I've lost all respect for Forbes since they've
insisted on employing hacks and trolls like Gordon Kelley.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2/9/23 4:38 AM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 09.02.23 um 11:27 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>> I use an addblocker on my computers, but not yet on my phone/tablet.
>
> On my Pixel I use FF as standard browser. There can be easily adblockers
> added. What I do not want to do is to install another browser.
>
> NoScript and uBlock Origin among a lot of other addons are available.

Likewise, but FF is slower than what I assume is Chrome :-( Mostly I
just want a quick answer/factoid so I just talk (I'm really lousy at
thumb typing) into the google fill-in box and hope for the best. What's
annoying is the popups in other apps that obscure the screen until you
find the tiny X to get rid of it.

--
Cheers, Bev
Real life doesn't always provide spoiler alerts and there's a
limit to how much sensitivity one is allowed to inflict on others.

On 2/9/23 5:25 AM, Neil wrote:
> On 2/8/2023 7:29 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> I was looking at android adblockers earlier today. A number of them
>> contained in-app ads and some said they shared the user's info with
>> third parties. Made me feel a bit uneasy..
>
> WTF?
>
> That's like saying "I was looking at people earlier today. A number of them
> had tattoos and some looked like they had shared a prison cell. Made me
> feel a bit uneasy..".
>
> Anyone can find lousy people & then claim because they don't know how to
> find good people, they unilaterally decreed that all people are lousy.
>
> Change "people" to "apps" and that's what you just said.

There are a lot more people than there are ad-blocker apps (maybe 20,
most with few users and low ratings). It's unrealistic to wish that the
reverse were true.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do.
They don't have the energy. If they had that much energy,
they'd have indoor plumbing by now." -- Ann Coulter

On 2/8/2023 4:29 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

<snip>

> I was looking at android adblockers earlier today.  A number of them
> contained in-app ads and some said they shared the user's info with
> third parties.  Made me feel a bit uneasy...

Without rooting you're not going to get the level of protection that you
can get with a hosts file.

Netguard (Android) and AdGuard Pro (iOS) will be the best you can do
without rooting or jailbreaking. Netguard needs to be side-loaded, the
version on the Google Play Store lacks some features.

Your Pixel is old enough, and out of warranty, so rooting would not be
an issue.

In article <ts477h$r812$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> Without rooting you're not going to get the level of protection that you
> can get with a hosts file.

demonstrably false. there are much easier and more effective options.

> Netguard (Android) and AdGuard Pro (iOS) will be the best you can do
> without rooting or jailbreaking.

also very much false.

On 2/9/23 5:38 PM, sms wrote:
> On 2/8/2023 4:29 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I was looking at android adblockers earlier today.  A number of them
>> contained in-app ads and some said they shared the user's info with
>> third parties.  Made me feel a bit uneasy...
>
> Without rooting you're not going to get the level of protection that you
> can get with a hosts file.
>
> Netguard (Android) and AdGuard Pro (iOS) will be the best you can do
> without rooting or jailbreaking. Netguard needs to be side-loaded, the
> version on the Google Play Store lacks some features.

Somebody (you?) pointed at the github version...

> Your Pixel is old enough, and out of warranty, so rooting would not be
> an issue.

Not a warranty worry, I just want to avoid bricking it. I have no
confidence in my ability to follow instructions that I HOPE will work.
The old battery lasted 5 years, so maybe the one I just replaced it with
will too.

Recent problem: Buying a nice LED shoplight which can supposedly be
controlled (brightness) by my phone, except the instructions are
ambiguous and don't seem to work no matter what order the steps occur.
Why should something this simple be so difficult?

I will look at Netguard, though.

--
Cheers, Bev
The early bird gets the worm, the second mouse gets the cheese.