While some here don't seem to like it, instead of replacing uBlock O, I suggest replacing Chrome with Brave.
Brave is great. Even my Mom uses it and now "hates commercials"
Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
41–50 of 50 posts
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this is why I agree with the government that Google has to sell off Chrome. This behavior just pisses me off. “Don’t do evil”, my ass.
And who do you think is going to buy it? And why wouldn't they do the same?
Because whoever buys it won’t also control search.
Clearly it won’t be MSFT or AAPL, and given other DOJ investigations, unlikely to be AMZN. So I at least feel we have a fighting chance in someone else’s hands.
Fingers crossed of course. But it’s a chance.
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#43Anyone have a recipe for running pihole on one’s laptop and proxying traffic through it? One you’ve used and can endorse pls. I too can Google. :)
I don't think that's a good idea, it should be a separate, ideally hardwired device (or VM on a host with an Ethernet connection). But I wonder if you could run the PiHole (or Technitium, or AdGuard Home, etc) in a container with Podman or Compose, and set your DNS to 127.0.0.1? I feel like that would create some kind of feedback loop.
Why not a good idea?? There is nothing that say it should be a separated hardware..
In fact, AdGuard app for iPhone does basically this, it install itself as an always on VPN to hijack DNS queries from apps..
You dont even need containers or VM for AdGuard, it have a windows version that you can install as a service and then just point the DNS to localhost..
For Pihole i seen guide that use WSL to run it locally, but using containers in this case might be easier..
I dont know Technitium so cant comment on it, but quick search it look like it also have a windows version so it might not require containers as well..
It is not the usual configuration but it work.. In this case i would point AdGuard to use whatever DNS is available in the local network so you do not loose access to local stuff..
If you are on a laptop it will require some manuall managing unfortunatelly, but if you are on a fixed network you just need to set it up once and forget about it..
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
And who do you think is going to buy it? And why wouldn't they do the same?
Because whoever buys it won’t also control search. Clearly it won’t be MSFT or AAPL, and given other DOJ investigations, unlikely to be AMZN. So I at least feel we have a fighting chance in someone else’s hands. Fingers crossed of course. But it’s a chance.
Dont know about that..
I do see MS buying it but keeping it as an independent foundation and letting other join to vote and help steer development... I could see Google itself doing this to chromium to avoid loose chrome..
Apple is more unlikely since they do not use Chromiun or Blink for Safari, but give that Blink is a fork of WebKit that is what Apple use in Safari i would not say chances are zero..
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a good idea, it should be a separate, ideally hardwired device (or VM on a host with an Ethernet connection). But I wonder if you could run the PiHole (or Technitium, or AdGuard Home, etc) in a container with Podman or Compose, and set your DNS to 127.0.0.1? I feel like that would create some kind of feedback loop.
Why not a good idea?? There is nothing that say it should be a separated hardware.. In fact, AdGuard app for iPhone does basically this, it install itself as an always on VPN to hijack DNS queries from apps.. You dont even need containers or VM for AdGuard, it have a windows version that you can install as a service and then just point the DNS to localhost.. For Pihole i seen guide that use WSL to run it locally, but…
That's a good point about phone VPNs! It feels like this would be counter to someone's recommended best practice, but now I'm curious and might try this on my own :)
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not a good idea?? There is nothing that say it should be a separated hardware.. In fact, AdGuard app for iPhone does basically this, it install itself as an always on VPN to hijack DNS queries from apps.. You dont even need containers or VM for AdGuard, it have a windows version that you can install as a service and then just point the DNS to localhost.. For Pihole i seen guide that use WSL to run it locally, but…
That's a good point about phone VPNs! It feels like this would be counter to someone's recommended best practice, but now I'm curious and might try this on my own :)
basically every adblock on iphone does this, usually as part of a premium paid upgrade..
iOS unfortunately does not have a way for those apps to hijack the OS level DNS... so they fake a VPN to configure thenselves as the VPN DNS server to allow then to capture all the local DNS traffic..
they do this because it is, as far as i know, their only option to do ad blocking for the whole device instead of just for safari..
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#47Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#48The technical reason was that uBlock Origin uses the "Manifest V2" extension interface. The new "Manifest V3" standard ever-so-coincidentally doesn't provide the tools necessary for thorough ad-blockers like UBO. You should switch to a browser that maintains support for good ad-blockers.
And this is why I agree with the government that Google has to sell off Chrome. This behavior just pisses me off. “Don’t do evil”, my ass.
The issue here is that in order to do its thing, uBlock Origin requires quite extensive access to the browser context, including the ability to intercept network traffic.
It’s pretty easy to see how this could be abused by malicious extensions, and security is the stated reason behind many of the Manifest v3 changes.
So it’s not clear that this is Google “being evil”, so much as it is trying to force web security forward, at the expense of user experience.
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because whoever buys it won’t also control search. Clearly it won’t be MSFT or AAPL, and given other DOJ investigations, unlikely to be AMZN. So I at least feel we have a fighting chance in someone else’s hands. Fingers crossed of course. But it’s a chance.
Dont know about that.. I do see MS buying it but keeping it as an independent foundation and letting other join to vote and help steer development... I could see Google itself doing this to chromium to avoid loose chrome.. Apple is more unlikely since they do not use Chromiun or Blink for Safari, but give that Blink is a fork of WebKit that is what Apple use in Safari i would not say chances are zero..
Fair.
My guesses would be Oracle, IBM, or Private Equity.
Re: Ask HN: Is uBlock Origin removed from Chrome extension?
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's a good idea, it should be a separate, ideally hardwired device (or VM on a host with an Ethernet connection). But I wonder if you could run the PiHole (or Technitium, or AdGuard Home, etc) in a container with Podman or Compose, and set your DNS to 127.0.0.1? I feel like that would create some kind of feedback loop.
Why not a good idea?? There is nothing that say it should be a separated hardware.. In fact, AdGuard app for iPhone does basically this, it install itself as an always on VPN to hijack DNS queries from apps.. You dont even need containers or VM for AdGuard, it have a windows version that you can install as a service and then just point the DNS to localhost.. For Pihole i seen guide that use WSL to run it locally, but…
[dead]