 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> So this is a Firefox question.
>
> Does anybody know how to turn off image loading, but only for one website?
Here's what I have.
General ad image blocking, I use adblock as Warp pointed out. At the
bottom of my message you'll find the regexps I use - works well enough.
If you want to be really thorough, get Adblock Plus, which I believe
allows you to automatically download good filtersets.
Flashblock has been mentioned, but I've never used it. Instead, I use
NoScript. It prevents scripts of any kind from loading (Java,
Javascript, Flash, etc). It's quite customizable, and you could probably
use it for just one page. I find it convenient to have it on all the
time and simply whitelist certain pages.
Like FlashBlock, Noscript will show a clickable area wherever there's
Java/Flash content. You merely have to click it and press OK to get just
that aspect of the site working.
(Then there's CookieSafe for your cookie concerns...).
[Adblock]
/\/pagead\//
/qksrv/
/\/(web)?ads?\//
/fastclick/
/\/(linkshare|pagead)\//
/imdb\.com\/(google\/|.*\.swf)/
/servedby|maxserving/
/atdmt/
/doubleclick|tribalfusion|fastclick|atdmt|servedby|qksrv/
/\/(web)?ads?\./
/us.a1.yimg.com/
/\/adv\//
/adserving/
/\/banners?\//
--
If a mute swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap?
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> /\/adv\//
> /adserving/
> /\/banners?\//
IMO there's the danger in such generic filtering that it will sometimes
filter something which is *not* an ad, and might be relevant to the contents
of the website.
I prefer using adblock on a site-by-site basis. In other words, whenever
there's an obnoxious ad that bothers my concentration, I block images from
that url+path.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 20:33:31 +0100, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did
spake, saying:
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> It means that if a single web page loads adverts from 25 different
>> domains, I have to manually block all 25 domains, one at a time.
>
> Use adblock in that case. You can right-click on the image and select
> to block images from that site from the context menu.
Have to say I'm surprised that anybody here is using Firefox and isn't
using FlashBlock and AdBlock; you might want to add Duplicate Tab, Web
Developer and Session Manger too.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
> Have to say I'm surprised that anybody here is using Firefox and isn't
> using FlashBlock and AdBlock; you might want to add Duplicate Tab, Web
> Developer and Session Manger too.
I've never heard of any of these things. I just use Firefox to, you
know, browse the Internet...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> I've never heard of any of these things. I just use Firefox to, you
> know, browse the Internet...
I've mentioned Adblock and NoScript a bunch of times on these groups.
--
Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> IMO there's the danger in such generic filtering that it will sometimes
> filter something which is *not* an ad, and might be relevant to the contents
> of the website.
Hasn't happened yet. Perhaps I did block non-ads, but they weren't
important enough for me to realize.
> I prefer using adblock on a site-by-site basis. In other words, whenever
> there's an obnoxious ad that bothers my concentration, I block images from
> that url+path.
I used to do it on a site basis, but it didn't work well for me. I
don't want to merely remove ads from sites I visit often. I want to
remove them from as many sites as possible, including a site I've never
seen that I may visit today.
--
Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz nous illumina en ce 2008-09-19 11:27 -->
> Warp wrote:
>> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> IMO there's the danger in such generic filtering that it will sometimes
>> filter something which is *not* an ad, and might be relevant to the
>> contents
>> of the website.
>
> Hasn't happened yet. Perhaps I did block non-ads, but they weren't
> important enough for me to realize.
>
>> I prefer using adblock on a site-by-site basis. In other words,
>> whenever
>> there's an obnoxious ad that bothers my concentration, I block images
>> from
>> that url+path.
>
> I used to do it on a site basis, but it didn't work well for me. I
> don't want to merely remove ads from sites I visit often. I want to
> remove them from as many sites as possible, including a site I've never
> seen that I may visit today.
>
With adblock, you can use "*" as a wildcard. So, I want to block some add? I
right-click the offending add and sélect block... In the dialog that show up, I
replace most of the string by a single *. Hit the return key and close. Voilà, I
see about 12+ ads disapear at once :) And if I encounter add by that server
anywhere else, they to, are blocked.
Some of the blocking strings are: "*doubleclick*", "*adbrite*", "*adserve*",...
or something like "<some site URL>/banner/*" if I want to remove the banners but
not the rest of the content.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you've been raytracing too long when you look at waterfalls, dust,
rain, snow, etc, and think: "If only I had a fractalized, vector based
particle-system modeler with collision detection!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain wrote:
> There is a FlashBlock addon available. I have it. It's one of those
> "can't live without" things, side by side with the addblock addon.
I have a flash-block! On my WinXP laptop, the privileged account can see
flash, and the non-administrator account doesn't show it. I haven't
quite figured that out. I even tried granting privs to the usual
account, installing flash, and revoking the privs, and it still doesn't
work. (Hmmm... I'll have to see if it works if I try it with the privs
turned on.)
Any ideas?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I have a flash-block! On my WinXP laptop, the privileged account can see
> flash, and the non-administrator account doesn't show it. I haven't
> quite figured that out. I even tried granting privs to the usual
> account, installing flash, and revoking the privs, and it still doesn't
> work. (Hmmm... I'll have to see if it works if I try it with the privs
> turned on.)
>
> Any ideas?
FLASH! OHHH! KING OF THE IMPOSSIBLE!
(Er... sorry about that.)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>
> True. But turning off "load images" and "load Java" and "load
> JavaScript" stops them from appearing. So I'm guessing the options are
> just badly named.
>
You said half of the pages are made with JS, so I'd guess disabling JS
would disable those adverts.
I have pretty simple solution myself - I don't have flash player installed.
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
