Brendan Eich claims to "fix" the web with an ad browser

[Omega X]

Since the advent of Brave, I've noticed many websites are now flat-out blocking me from browsing their site with an adblocker running. Oh well, Forbes has been a joke for a long time now anyway.

Forbes has been doing this a while now, and so does Wired. Neither one is necessary when there are better sources.

[trolly]

If they just cover the text with something, there is still the page source.

[patrickjdempsey]

Forbes now uses a redirect landing page and won't forward you to the content page if it detects an adblocker. They used to give a warning and let you click through, now it just flat out blocks you. It's a bizarre future.

[Drumbrake]

Out of curiosity, does this also happen with Javascript disabled?

Is it possible that some of the recent "anti-antiblocker" filter lists would counteract this?

[Omega X]

Out of curiosity, does this also happen with Javascript disabled?

Is it possible that some of the recent "anti-antiblocker" filter lists would counteract this?

There was a rumor that this only affected ABP. Ublock Origin was able to get through somehow.

[Grumpus]

Tried to get access and it appears to detect NoScript?
Tried allowing whole page and a couple of other things, kept getting a simple page with a Sir Richard Branson quote
Even after clearing the cache and turning off NOScript, wonder if it's the Firefox Tracking protection also?

[Omega X]

It seems that the script is blocking people even without any adblocker installed. Its completely useless.

[Gort]

There was a rumor that this only affected ABP. Ublock Origin was able to get through somehow.

Doesn't seem to be a rumour, at least not for me, as I'm able to see the Forbes site fine with Ublock Origin installed.

@Grumpus: The initial page you'll see is a welcome page with the quote of the day. Wait for ten to fifteen seconds, and it'll redirect you to its main page.

[Grumpus]

@Gort - no re-direct after 30 + seconds. Could be one of the peripheral things that try and load but cleared the cache and allowed all the page.

[smsmith]

We noticed you still have ad blocker enabled. By turning it off or whitelisting Forbes.com, you can continue to our site and receive the Forbes ad-light experience.

Generous. For thirty days they'll play nice with you. After thirty, forget it pal, you get the full treatment.

I haven't browsed the web without some sort of ad-blocker in over 10 years. It's unsettling to see what it really looks like when I peek over my wife's shoulder at what she is browsing.

[patrickjdempsey]

Interesting. The warning is actually completely incorrect anyway. You can totally disable ABP and Forbes still won't let you in. But if you disable Tracker Blocking in the browser.... then Forbes lets you in... even with the ad blocker running. So Forbes isn't really at all concerned about you blocking ads... they are concerned about you blocking trackers. Which must be where all the real money is, huh? So maybe Eich is on to something, as long as his browser allows tracking, it doesn't matter what happens to the ads.

[Grumpus]

Doesn't look good for his browser if it ignores privacy and a degree of anonymity.

[Drumbrake]

Well, so far it does look good enough for the others... he's just shining a light on that.
Not that I agree with the idea.

[Drumbrake]

Out of curiosity, does this also happen with Javascript disabled?

Is it possible that some of the recent "anti-antiblocker" filter lists would counteract this?

There was a rumor that this only affected ABP. Ublock Origin was able to get through somehow.

Possibly because uBlock, according to its author gorhill, is not strictly an adblocker but rather a wide-spectrum "content blocker" : with 1st and 3d party scripts blocked, it acts in a way kinda like NoScript (but not exactly, as far as I know) .
Or possibly gorhill has put some other "anti-antiblocker" defense in place.