?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Great LJ "features" of our time. - Her Most Regal Majesty, the Queen of Snark
void where prohibited, except by law
sesquipedality
sesquipedality
Great LJ "features" of our time.
Apparently those pointless little preview windows occasionally serve up ads too.

Fortunately it is possible to turn them off, although LJ don't make it easy.

Here are some instructions.

Also if there is anyone out there with Firefox not running Adblock Plus and Filterset-G ... why are you not running Adblock Plus and Filterset-G?

Another great "feature" is this new option to act like some sort of thought police on other people's journals, erm, I mean tag posts with adult or inappropriate content. I have changed my options to tag my journal as "adult themes" (which I think means I swear a lot, but don't post nekkid pics), because I'd just prefer to avoid the hassle of randoms complaining that I'm not 'child friendly'. The fucks.

Still conflicted about the morality of even voluntarily censoring access though.

Tags:

18 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
(Deleted comment)
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: November 30th, 2007 07:23 pm (UTC) (Link)
But regardless, isn't your browsing experience more pleasant without them.

And Adblock + Filterset-G just makes the whole process of not being served ads entirely automatic.
(Deleted comment)
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: November 30th, 2007 07:28 pm (UTC) (Link)
Ah, inertia. That makes sense.
imc From: imc Date: December 1st, 2007 10:18 am (UTC) (Link)
Me too. But I run with JavaScript disabled, so all the most offensive ads (including those pop-up link previews on LiveJournal) just don't work on my browser.

(Also, just to be awkward, I have SeaMonkey rather than Firefox, so some Firefox extensions don't work on it although I believe Adblock Plus is one that can be made to work.)

What's Filterset-G?
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: December 1st, 2007 10:46 am (UTC) (Link)
Automatically updated Adblock filters, so you don't have to worry about working out which sites to block.
rysmiel From: rysmiel Date: November 30th, 2007 07:53 pm (UTC) (Link)
IHNPIJWTS *iconlove*.
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: November 30th, 2007 07:57 pm (UTC) (Link)
Not original, sadly, but very cool.
From: ex_lark_asc Date: November 30th, 2007 10:34 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh my fucking G*d.

(See, now you have even more adult content).

That filtering thing is *so incredibly spineless*.

Is there a "cuntjournal" or something like that, where you can be a real honest-to-goodness grown-up who swears and has sex and everything, and not have to worry about twats and their childreeeeeeeen?

I'm leaving mine as "none". All I ever post about in public entries is politics, and if that's not adult content I don't know what is, but I'm fucked if I'm going to edit the real world for The Little Darlings.
chrisvenus From: chrisvenus Date: December 2nd, 2007 12:07 am (UTC) (Link)
What censoring do they do? I've heard a few people going on about this but as far as I can tell if stuff is flagged as adult or offensive they dont' censor it. They either exclude it from searche sin the case of offensive or put a "are you old enough" inbetween page for non-logged in users and those under 18. Is this really a morality question or is it just adding in fucntionality that some think is unnecessary but is not really at all harmful?
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: December 2nd, 2007 10:59 am (UTC) (Link)
I believe that accounts of children under 13 are blocked from stuff marked "adult themes" and all children from "explicit adult content". The last news post contains a link to detailed info about what they're doing.
chrisvenus From: chrisvenus Date: December 2nd, 2007 12:21 pm (UTC) (Link)
Ah yes. I'd been confused by the fact that in their terminology the under 13s get intermediate pages but they aren't allowed to go past them. That's a bit badly described. :)
chrisvenus From: chrisvenus Date: December 2nd, 2007 12:13 am (UTC) (Link)
Oh, and I didn't turn off those previews that way. I clicked on the options (or settings or similar) button on the corner of the preview window and in the settings told it never to display them to me. Though I haven't bothered checking if it is still doing something but it just seems easier than messing around.

And I don't use adblockers. I guess I could though because I think I do notice times when it slows down page loads.
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: December 2nd, 2007 10:56 am (UTC) (Link)
I didn't notice that option. Now you mention it I seem to recall that some people were objecting to have to have their site accept a cookie, and the method above, by virtue of never hitting the site, uses slightly less bandwidth.
chrisvenus From: chrisvenus Date: December 2nd, 2007 12:24 pm (UTC) (Link)
Yeah, I can imagine it is a bit more bandwidth but as long as they don't do other evil things (like tracking you or doing nefarious invisible things) then at least it is relatively nice software. May get around to installing those ad-blockers anyway though.
undyingking From: undyingking Date: December 2nd, 2007 12:02 pm (UTC) (Link)
Because they've read the Adblock Plus FAQ about problems with Filterset-G?
sesquipedality From: sesquipedality Date: December 2nd, 2007 09:11 pm (UTC) (Link)
That's worth knowing. Thank you.
From: senji Date: December 3rd, 2007 02:24 pm (UTC) (Link)
What are these pointless little preview windows of which you speak?

Also, I don't run AB+ and Filterset-G because mehtoomuchfaff and I don't see adverts anyway.
18 comments or Leave a comment