My takeaway was that it's pretty impressive they still respond to exclusion requests in a timely manner.
Maybe it's good just to have a reminder that much of our infrastructure is maintained by volunteers. Sometimes important policy decisions get made by whoever showed up and started doing the work in a way that looks competent to others.
Articles are supposed to have a point, a goal, etc. The goal might be persuasive, it might be to establish facts, it might be to argue for a specific change or against one. It's up to the reader to agree or disagree with what the article has laid out.
But we need something to agree or disagree with. In this case, I had no idea what the point of the article was (beyond a vague feeling that the author doesn't like EasyList).
Even so, you could fix everything with a one line Perl command.
Please.
RewriteRule "^/+new_path/+(.+)$" /advert/$1 [L]
... but that's also something they could again fix with another RewriteRule, I guess?
RewriteRule "^(.*)/+new_path/+(.+)$" $1/advert/$2 [L]
list maintainers should be responsible regression test their lists for normal content and not do dumb things
this is also a problem with bad/unscrupulous spam listings which list domains based on unsubstantiated requests, etc
I am against advertising and marketing and yet spend a considerable amount of money online, and I’m confident most of HN does the same.
If parts of your audience blocks ads then it's probably a good idea to test your web site with uBlock installed, just as you already test with Safari and MSIE.
It's specifically not a good idea to rely on the block list maintainers who will have a hard time separating earnest bug reports from all the bogus ones who think they've found a clever way to avoid blocklists.
They responded and removed amp-analytics. I'm not that impressed.