On 19 Jun 2016 13:59:01 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>On 2016-06-19, > wrote:
>
>> It's because I use Adblock that tinypic got its knickers in a knot.
>
>I'm not sure how Adblock does its thing. I use NoScript.
>
>Basically, when you go to a website, it has all kindsa scripts it runs
>to accomplish its task. Some are server-side scripts (their server
>hasta run a script fer each new viewer), but more are client-side (IE, FF,
>browsers) scripts, which run on YOUR computer. Flash and Javascript are
>two examples of client-side scripts that a website needs YOUR computer
>to both have and run (can't be blocked!) in order for the web-site to
>properly function.
I don`t get those irritating jump up and down ads, in fact I get no
ads.
>
>I notice websites are recently becoming quite aggresive in getting you
>to "enable" yer client-side utilities, which inludes disabling
>blockers. Usta be a website jes didn't work. Now, they're actively
>chastising one fer not having client-side scripts enabled. Screw 'em.
>I wanna be in control of what my computer does, not some damn website!
Correct - the Daily Telegraph always has a banner which says `We see
you have an ad blocker`and asks me to dismantle it, which I don`t. I
have gone to the odd site which wouldn`t allow Adblock, so I just left
it. The tinypic furore was irritating though because it didn`t say
anything about adblocker - then when postimage was pointed out, I
figured to hell with tinypics histrionics.
>
>Jes a endorsement of NoScript. It does more than jes block ads. It
>stops ALL client-side scripts (from a website) from running on YOUR
>computer. It tells you how many client-side scripts are running (two
>dozen scripts is not uncommon!), and then lets you enable each script,
>one-at-a-time. Full control!
>
>(works best with Mozilla browsers)
>
>nb
I always use Mozilla, can`t handle Internet Exploder.