>Assuming it actually works (which I'm not sure about),

Which it probably doesn't, given that it uses XHRs to "click" on ads, which is super detectable, and given the proliferation of ad fraud I'd assume all networks already filter out.

▲

Larrikin 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Google wouldn't have gone out of their way to block it on Chrome if it didn't work.

▲

Lalabadie 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The other assumption here is that ad networks want to filter out all clicks but the most legitimate.

I don't think that's a very lucid assessment of how advertisers operate on the Internet. We all agree that they could take these steps. If AdNauseam doesn't look like outright fraud in the logs (which they don't if it's all distinct IPs and browsers), I don't think they want to cut it out from their revenue and viewer analytics.

	▲	gruez 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>If AdNauseam doesn't look like outright fraud in the logs (which they don't if it's all distinct IPs and browsers) You think ad networks don't have logs more sophisticated than default nginx/apache logs? XHRs are trivially detectable by headers alone.