zlacker

I run an ad blocker on all of my devices (mix of uBlock or Brave browser) and I'm pretty surprised how infrequently sites ask me to disable it to access content. Not sure if your experience is different.

>>wbobei+(OP)
Probably because ublock deletes those “disable Adblock“ screens.

>>vbezhe+5a
Any proper gate for a user to access content should be managed by a server, not on the client side. It would have to be the same for WEI. If they can detect that I'm using an adblocker, there's no reason they couldn't prevent me from accessing content by not even serving the content in the first place.

>>wbobei+Xb
Unless they can only detect it with client-side code?

>>wbobei+Xb
It's a cat and mouse game between the ad-blockers and ad-blocker-blockers. I imagine if WEI actually becomes a thing, WEI countermeasures will also emerge, and WEI counter-countermeasures soon after.

A better plan might be for websites to find some a better way to sustain themselves, possibly by running ads that are more relevant and less obnoxious so that users wouldn't block them.

>>wbobei+Xb
the point of remote attestation is the environment the client is running in can be measured by the server and any tampering detected

tampering meaning running your code instead of theirs

>>blibbl+iG
The conflict emerges because the device is mine, not theirs. I ask for content, they send it. It seems am unfair burden to collude with os and hardware manufactures to force the user to give up general computing in order to visit an otherwise unknown web page. It would be a much better experience to go dark with content like Twitter has done than to remove general computing from the web.