What is your opinion on .js Bitcoin Miners?
Now that most big websites are starting to use these methods, will we see the end of the ads and clickbaits and the beginning of the CPU hoggers?
Is this for the best or for the worse?
How can we defend against this if most websites require javascript to work?
Block it
If the site asks for it, it can be blocked.
I would be OK if they replaced shitty capcha with a bitcoin captcha
They could just include it as part of the javascript needed for the functioning of the site. If you block it then the buttons don't work.
And how do you propose that would work?
uMatrix
Firefox has crashed once today for me due to a jquery animation loop with settimout causing a memory leak.
what if the website is hosting the offending js itself? Are going to perform a blanket banning on every possible .js out there?
This.
They will be blocked in the same way ads are blocked, uBlock Origin and the like all have this functionality.
Yet js could be obfuscated and the ad blocker could resort to block all js on a certain site. So, sites which require javascript to load at all will fail.
Yes, javascript was a mistake
Replace the google botnet CAPTCHA with something like coin-hive.com
Is this a thing now? I mean why not BASIC miner running on a C64 for that matter?
Limit CPU usage per tab to something like 1-2% after the website has been fully loaded.
meme coin.js is not a turing test and could lead to botnet shitpostings easily.
fancy stuff like webgl animations will require more.
difference is, it's CPU-bound. Don't mind it as long as spidermonkey doesn't leak any more memory running such a script
Any machine learning image analyzer can beat the legacy CAPTCHA effortlessly, I use one myself, I just would rather avoid google
How big of a userbase do you need to actually make some cash? (just like site ads which have shit payout unless you're a huge site) Wanted to do a performance test on mobile
>Now that most big websites are starting to use these methods
List one site that uses this besides The Pirate Bay, which doesn't use it any more.
>Any machine learning image analyzer can beat the legacy CAPTCHA effortlessly
Yes, captcha sometimes can be broken. This doesn't mean that it isn't effective. And again, botnetcoin.js is not a turing test.
Really can't tell if you're retarded and don't understand how this works at all or baiting. I'll assume the latter.
If you're on a site that's both running WebGL and a shitcoin miner in the background, it's going to run like fried dogshit even on an OCed 7700K.
Even better, let's just use both.
If it keeps mobilefags out, I support it
Not an argument, using a captcha miner undermines spammer botnets since they'd have limited resources for each post, the computational power needed is exponentially higher than an image analyzer, and the energy cost alone is also higher than hiring a starving Indian to solve capchas
Not to mention it gives hiro some cash
>Now that most big websites are starting to use these methods
Name one
1) Still not a turing test.
2) Allowing a load that's not scandalously heavy for an average pajeet = 100000 posts/s for a small botnet.
3) phoneposters
Yeah, because he clearly needs it.
> What is your opinion on .js Bitcoin Miners?
Generally speaking, I don't like them and I'll block them
> Is this for the best or for the worse?
worse of course, if every website we visit is gonna use my CPU to mine some BTC then god help the CPU, but desu for websites that provide good services for free I don't mind giving some of my CPU cycles to help them out, but as long as they ask for my permission then why not!
Sup Forums
it should, at best, in a different tab. Like, "if you want to support the website, consider idling hard on the tab you open clicking here"
seti-at-home-alike
there was also that porn project functioning in a similar way but I keep forgetting about it
What happens when they start packing in webassembly ones?
Will they be able to be filtered then?
> Sup Forums
is not big
You literally don't know what you're talking about.
Look into some actual user numbers. You'd be amazed.
Haven't encountered it so I don't really mind. Think it's a neat idea.
can a masterfully crafted js mine buttcoins on phone GPUs?
>tfw people will eventually need powerful facebook machines actually powerful
I wouldn't particularly mind under the right conditions:
>no ads or other sorts of malware crap
>sensible throttle setting, like 20% or something
>clearly visible option to turn it off if you actually want to use your CPU for something actually useful
>default off on battery powered devices (can you even tell reliably from a browser?)
Basically the only way I would accept this is in a form in which no greedy scumhoover will ever implement it, as such should this ever catch on, I expect I would block everything like I do with ads nowadays.
It's also not using it.
Depends how it works. If it's embedded in the background and runs without your consent or knowledge, then it's just malware. I don't mind the system the creators used on their site though, they had a window that you'd open and could mine in exchange for premium membership, earning 1 second of membership for every 20 hashes solved (normally 9€/mo). Systems like this have the potential to be good alternatives to both ads and subscription models but it needs to be implemented properly so that the user is in control. It also won't work on sites that you get a lot of mobile users on, phones are both incredibly slow at it and have their battery killed by it.
According to their numbers, a site with 10-20 active miners would get ~0.3 XMR/mo, however they don't say what constitutes an active miner. On their site they made 60 XMR in two weeks, peaking at 2,000 active miners combining for 120kh/s
how does a tech illiterate person block this without wiping the page
Of course it's not!!
fuck off already
Coinhive is literal botnet.
But it's MIT licensed, so it's free software.
Is this botnet? Will Stallman approve?
hmmm
A botnet can be free software user.
No, you. I tried to express legit and rational remarks. You're the child resorting to shitposting. You're the one who needs to go.
Through a browser addon?
free != good
So what if it's free software? If I quickly wrote a zipbomb and made it free software would you use it?
uBlock Origin is still the best shot for such an illiterate individual; it has to be said that presently coin-hive doesn't seem to trigger a block rule, at least in my setup. coin-hive is rather blocked in uMatrix on sites like thebay.tv
Exactly my point. So what's all this "nonfree as in pizza javascript" fuzz Stallman was so autistic about?
>is rather blocked in uMatrix
to be clear, it's not blocked because it triggers some lists but simply because it's a third-party script. The day someone incorporates such a script into their main site it's the day either complete js blockage or finely grained uBlock/uMatrix rules will be needed.
exactly! we love everything free and open but that doesn't make it good! and we know software development this days
>he doesn't know
As long it's done in a way that doesn't rape your performance, it sounds fair.
How long until miners become part of pretty much everything?
I wonder how many multiplayer games have miners running in them.
You literally would never be able to detect them and they would make a fortune.
So this is why LOTRO performing so bad!
captcha: american only
what the fuck
I'd doubt it simply because they *already* use up CPU and GPU just running by themselves. It wouldn't be practical
WebAssembly :^)
that would be an improvement over any form of tortured JScript
Webdev here, thanks for this thread OP, those embedded crypto miners seem fun. Great potential revenue source, though it would be better if it would utilize the GPU too, I'm sure this is possible with some neat js.
I'm not sure what the issue is here though, if you don't like it then just don't use the website, nobody is forcing you to visit it. :^)
> if you don't like it then just don't use the website, nobody is forcing you to visit it.
Sometimes we are forced to use a website becasue he's the only good source for something we want soo badly!
Well then respect the developer and use the website as intended.
>Now that most big websites are starting to use these methods
[Citation needed]
moot point, next you'll tell me that adblocking is a crime.
I'm the only who's in charge to decide what's running on my machines. A webdev who does not adjust to different audience and wants to shove down its shitty pathetic spaghetti is literally cancer
>next you'll tell me that adblocking is a crime
It should be.
>I'm the only who's in charge to decide what's running on my machines.
And I'm in charge how my webpage behaves and how it's being delivered. If you try to block any script or cookie you will get a white screen of death (every sane website should work like that). If you don't like it then don't connect to it, simple.
Let him talk shit! a site forcing its shit on users is not gonna be a good and promising website anyway.
>a site forcing its shit on users is not gonna be a good and promising website anyway
Yeah, just like facebook, youtube, instagram, etc. Nobody is using them at all, right?
How about you respect the user and ask them if you can use their computer in ways that aren't what the website is advertising it will be used as?
The developer knows best what his users want.
>And I'm in charge how my webpage behaves and how it's being delivered.
>my
if it's yours didn't where is problem?!! but if it's for others to use then you don't have to decide on their behalf
Even if that was the case, some people don't want what's best. They just want what the website says.
>Adblocking should be a crime
you've totally lost contact with reality. And no, what enters in my PC is decided just by me. and no one else.
>And I'm in charge how my webpage behaves and how it's being delivered
to accommodate MY usage cases (mobile, desktop) and nothing more. If you dictate something that goes against your userbase pretending to shove them down your shit, you're just a shitty webdev.
None of those websites ceases to work with uBlock and the like, idiot.
>web"""""dev"""""
fuck this shit, then you are shitty dev for that matter
>The developer knows best what his users want.
take a load of this fucking idiot.
>adblocking should be a crime
Why don't you go write about it on your blog, faggot.
In any case, it means that content providers get some passive cash flow, and they get to keep every single dime of this. Cuts the middle-man (ad networks, Goolag) out completely.
>all these buttmad autistic freeloaders
If you are connecting to my website then you are giving your consent to run my code on your machine, which is necessary to load the website. You don't own the website and you are not allowed to tamper with it, the webdeveloper has the last say in how his website is accessed. You are free to disagree and not visit the website in the first place. But if you try to run it in a different way as intended you are committing piracy and committing cyber crime for tampering with the website.
And see if really "The developer knows best what his users want."?
>If you are connecting to my website then you are giving your consent to run my code on your machine, which is necessary to load the website.
No, I'm consenting to running the website that you promise. If you do anything unexpected, you need to inform me before doing that. It's literally in the law.
>and you are not allowed to tamper with it
Why even bring this up? That's not what happening. The website (the thing on your server) stays intact.
They really do know what their users want, the data trackers collect about you tell more useful and truthful information about your behaviors and desires then you could ever articulate.
>then you are giving your consent to run my code
No. I'm requesting content. Not giving consent to anything.
>You don't own the website
you don't own my CPU, bandwidth and browser.
>you are not allowed to tamper
No, YOU are not allowed to tamper with my stuff.
Fucking idiot. You're in charge only of serving content or denying to serve it.
>But if you try to run it in a different way as intended you are committing piracy and committing cyber crime for tampering with the website.
TIL
>No, I'm consenting to running the website that you promise. If you do anything unexpected, you need to inform me before doing that. It's literally in the law.
I am not obligated to inform you about every detail of how my website operates, especially the business logic, there is no such law.
>Why even bring this up? That's not what happening. The website (the thing on your server) stays intact.
The client-side code is part of the website, running it in a different way as intended is tampering.
>No. I'm requesting content. Not giving consent to anything.
You are not entitled to that content, if you are requesting it then you will also receive it in the way it was intended.
>you don't own my CPU, bandwidth and browser.
I own the client-side part of the website, if you don't like it then don't connect to the website.
>You're in charge only of serving content or denying to serve it.
I am also in charge of how the served content is received.
>I own the client-side part of the website, if you don't like it then don't connect to the website.
Jesus Fucking Christ, please tell me you're just baiting. No, you do not own my browser, fucking idiot. If you don't like it, refuse my requests.
>I am also in charge of how the served content is received.
>You are not entitled to that content
You are not entitled to run whatever you want on my machine. Your are entitled only to serve stuff I requested. It's your duty to accommodate MY WAY to view content. How I /dev/null your fucking botnet is not your fucking business. You are obliged to meet your userbase, their needs and usage cases. You may refuse to serve stuff if I'm refusing to run your shitty javascript, have fun with it.
there is nothing worse than huge CPU load when visiting website!
classic ads are much less intrusive lol
i wonder how much resources they would actually need per user to actually be worth more than ads right now, like its less than pennies per user right now just for ads
even if its not worth it now, if wesites seriously start doing this it would be an entire new sector to bitcoin economy
very itneresting
thats around $200 a day
>bitcoin mining ads come out
>websites start making their websites lighter so they don't waste so much client resources so they can mine more coins
>block the ads and you get lighter websites
I fail to see the downside
>No, you do not own my browser, fucking idiot. If you don't like it, refuse my requests.
I own the code that runs on your browser, how the front-end gets executed. If you tamper with any of this you are committing copyright infringement. If you don't like the way the website loads then don't visit it.
>You are not entitled to run whatever you want on my machine.
I am entitled to present my website in whatever method I want.
>How I /dev/null your fucking botnet is not your fucking business
A script that supports the continued existence of a website is not a "botnet" you deluded manchild. And no, you are not allowed to tamper with the presentation code.
>It's your duty to accommodate MY WAY to view content
No, the webdeveloper is in charge how the content is viewed, you are not entitled to impose on others how they should run their website, if you don't like the method of presentation then stop being an entitled autist and don't visit the website.
>You are obliged to meet your userbase, their needs and usage cases
With widely available tracking software this is easier than ever.
>You may refuse to serve stuff if I'm refusing to run your shitty javascript, have fun with it.
Already doing it. Hope more websites will catch on it, you entitled leeches need to be kicked out of the internet.
The adblocking war will be won by the users.
think the /r9k NEETs are leaking, sorry you have to put up with such users
>If you block it then the buttons don't work.
What buttons lol? I literally use an extension that grabs a snapshot of the site and then just read that; I haven't actually browsed a website in years. A static snapshot is all you need anyway.
but I personally do not like ads. crypto mining seems like a better compromise to me anyway.
>Already doing it. Hope more websites will catch on it
Only shitty, malicious obscure sites refuse to serve stuff if you don't run their botnets. Have fun with it and with the falling of your user base. Don't worry, you won't receive any more visit from me as soon as you try to show down your shit.
> If you tamper with any of this you are committing copyright infringement. If you don't like the way the website loads then don't visit it.
Are you fucking dense? No, it literally isn't copyright infringment you fucking idiot. A client request is NOT a consent to anything and how the software renders your content is NOT "tampering" with your server or with your "intellectual property". Fucking idiot.
>I am entitled to present my website in whatever method I want.
You are entitled to feel self-entitled and be jobless.
>A script that supports the continued existence of a website is not a "botnet" you deluded manchild
You fucking idiot, your shitty deluded websites are failing their business model and it's not my duty to run botnets to support it without my fucking expressed content, fucking idiot.
>And no, you are not allowed to tamper with the presentation code.
Not your business, you don't have ANY right on how my browser renders your shitty javascript. It's not TAMPERING, you fucking idiot.
>No, the webdeveloper is in charge how the content is viewed, you are not entitled to impose on others how they should run their website
the userbase dictate how a webdev should work, not the contrary. A webdev forcing his shitty views on its users is a failed webdev.
only a NEET pretending to be a webdev would write like him.
>copyright infringement
yeah sue you users, it will be fun. Don't forget to sue any browser vendor allowing their users to switch javascript off. And pretty much any browser extension developer allowing users to """tamper""" with the presented content.
You never read forms? What about any real-time websites like chats or websites that have "facebookesque" asynchronous refilling whenever you scroll far enough down? (instead of pagination for example)
most websites these days can not be viewed as a static snapshot, you likely miss out of the end of the text and so on.
>Have fun with it and with the falling of your user base. Don't worry, you won't receive any more visit from me as soon as you try to show down your shit
My userbase is steadily increasing because my website deliver a smooth and modern experience which is adjusted according to the analytics of my userbase. Normal people will take a properly working website over some autistic "muh privacy" way of browsing or disgusting scriptless browser, nobody actually behaves like you cyberniggers.
>A client request is NOT a consent to anything and how the software renders your content is NOT "tampering" with your server or with your "intellectual property"
If you are accessing website content in a different way than throught the scripts it uses then you are tampering with the website and infringing the copyright.
>your shitty deluded websites are failing their business model
The only websites that are failing are those that don't secure themselves against piratefags like you.
>you don't have ANY right on how my browser renders your shitty javascript
The moment you make a request to a website you either access the received content as intended by the developer or by tampering with the website ie. blocking some functionality or using custom userscripts, which is obviously piracy.
>the userbase dictate how a webdev should work, not the contrary. A webdev forcing his shitty views on its users is a failed webdev
No, the webdev has the last say on how his website works. If a user doesn't like it, then he can just leave the site, how hard is that to understand? You are not entitled to a website you child, get it through your head.
I just refuse to serve them content, pretty simple. Is really such a horrible thing to ask somebody to not behave like a thieving asshole?
>No, you do not own my browser, fucking idiot.
Neither do you legally. You are only using the browser under a user license that you agree to when you install it. You don't own the browser even if you pay for it. If the makers of the browser deletes all your bookmarks for fun then you have no recourse because it's legally THEIR service you are using. User license agreements have been tested in courts.
>You are not entitled to run whatever you want on my machine.
It's YOU requesting it
>You are obliged to meet your userbase, their needs and usage cases.
users have no say in that. If users don't like it they should not request the javascript. Anyone requesting the javascript implicitly gives concept.
>If you are accessing website content in a different way than throught the scripts it uses then you are tampering with the website and infringing the copyright.
and guess what, i will still do that and decide what to run or not run on my machine, i will block all your ads and anti-adblocker scripts, and all tracking scripts in general and there ain't NOTHING you can do, nigger
inserting ads into websites looks shit and is for jobless poorfags who can't afford to pay for their website out of their own pocket
