15 Oct
2011
15 Oct
'11
12:07 p.m.
On 15/10/11 2:46 PM, Ray Arachelian wrote:
On 10/13/2011 07:16 PM, Jules Richardson wrote:
:)
Keith M wrote:
What's more noticeable? Waiting for 3-4 large bandwidth consuming ads
to load from various places while 1x1 pixel flash and images load from
3-4 other places and various tracking cookies to be set and fetched so
that animated targeted ads can bounce up and down, or processing every
HREF through a filter in memory at CPU speed? I can vouch for Adblock+ and NoScript. Adblock+
is truly great and
truly transparent. You won't even know its there --- you just wont
see any more ads. Manually adding blocks is easy.
Horribly OT, but I keep wondering about the overhead of that. There
must be some grunt-work involved just to see if a URL matches
something in its block list, however minor. With the enormous list of
sites / domains that it must have to filter these days, that overhead
*might* be noticeable to a user (vs. what it would be like if there
weren't the offending items in the source markup in the first place).
If anything I'd bet that the CPU power wasted on displaying animated ads
is far higher than that "wasted" on a bunch regexps preventing that crap
from loading in the first place.
Oh, ONLY by a few orders of magnitude!
--T