A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store • Hacker News Board

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#381

Post by sleepless » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:53 PM UTC

ravenstine wrote: post #219

radicalbyte wrote: post #6

It's time to switch to Firefox as my main web browser. It's faster and generally more efficient than Chrome plus it has the most important extensions. The most surprising thing is that the Android version of Firefox is excellent. So good that I switched from Chrome a few months ago when this expected news first dropped. No ads on mobile is awesome.

Anyone thinking of installing Firefox should check out the Multi-Account Containers addon. I'm pretty sure such functionality doesn't exist for Chrome, and it makes it possible to isolate different sites and logins from each other. It's one of the best reasons to switch to Firefox, in my opinion.

I love it. Wish container settings would be synced though: https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/issues/3... #1 most requested feature so there's hope, although it's been open for over two years. Maybe now that the new bookmark sync mechanism is rolled out in Firefox 70, the sync team may have capacity for a new task.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#382

Post by MaryKMabry » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:56 PM UTC

Darvon wrote: post #250

kettlecorn wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used Firefox before Chrome and have tried to swap numerous times in the past (and have been using it for the last few weeks). Advocates for Firefox often say "Firefox is better, just try switching!" yet when people point out reasons it's not better the response is "Oh those don't matter, you're just being nitpicky!" But it's not a very gentle push back, it's forceful. In this thread someone says "I don't like how m…

It's no skin off my nose if you want to feed Google, but personally I have no idea what you're talking about as there's never been something I couldn't do on firefox.

You don't have to feed Google though if you want to use a Chrome based browser. While probably not as safe as Firefox, there's privacy conscientious options such as Ungoogled Chromium, maybe even Brave if you're keen on the Chrome experience but also care about your privacy.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#383

Post by zamadatix » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:57 PM UTC

SomeOtherThrow wrote: post #52

You can still side load https://adnauseam.io/

You get a bunch of nagging when you sideload.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#384

Post by ColanR » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:57 PM UTC

sleepless wrote: post #381

ravenstine wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone thinking of installing Firefox should check out the Multi-Account Containers addon. I'm pretty sure such functionality doesn't exist for Chrome, and it makes it possible to isolate different sites and logins from each other. It's one of the best reasons to switch to Firefox, in my opinion.

I love it. Wish container settings would be synced though: https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/issues/3... #1 most requested feature so there's hope, although it's been open for over two years. Maybe now that the new bookmark sync mechanism is rolled out in Firefox 70, the sync team may have capacity for a new task.

I agree. Ran into that wish again this morning setting up a new computer installation. Only thing that I have to carry over manually.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#385

Post by randompi » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:58 PM UTC

Does that mean the end of uBO in Chrome?

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#386

Post by matheusmoreira » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:59 PM UTC

ravenstine wrote: post #219

radicalbyte wrote: post #6

It's time to switch to Firefox as my main web browser. It's faster and generally more efficient than Chrome plus it has the most important extensions. The most surprising thing is that the Android version of Firefox is excellent. So good that I switched from Chrome a few months ago when this expected news first dropped. No ads on mobile is awesome.

Anyone thinking of installing Firefox should check out the Multi-Account Containers addon. I'm pretty sure such functionality doesn't exist for Chrome, and it makes it possible to isolate different sites and logins from each other. It's one of the best reasons to switch to Firefox, in my opinion.

Thank you for posting this, never realized such a thing existed. Makes it easy to maintain different identities. It's made by Mozilla too. Wonder why it isn't a core feature of Firefox.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#387

Post by sleepless » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 5:59 PM UTC

ColanR wrote: post #384

sleepless wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love it. Wish container settings would be synced though: https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/issues/3... #1 most requested feature so there's hope, although it's been open for over two years. Maybe now that the new bookmark sync mechanism is rolled out in Firefox 70, the sync team may have capacity for a new task.

I agree. Ran into that wish again this morning setting up a new computer installation. Only thing that I have to carry over manually.

Very annoying, especially if you are testing stuff or debugging in firefox and frequently change profiles. Also disabling seems to reset all settings for the container add-on which is not great to put it mildly.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#388

Post by feanaro » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 6:00 PM UTC

somehnguy wrote: post #281

Ygg2 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, if you had piece of software that worked fine on Windows and ran like crap on Linux, you would blame Linux?

I think this is missing the point. Assigning blame doesn't really matter - one works for his use case and one doesn't. When you're trying to get work done the path of least resistance is more preferable than using software that performs poorly because of your ideals. But to answer your question: If they are based on the same code, yes. I don't see why you wouldn't.

But they fundamentally cannot be based on the same code if you go deep enough. The system calls / API are different, so the implementations have to diverge at some point.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#389

Post by lordnacho » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 6:00 PM UTC

radicalbyte wrote: post #6

It's time to switch to Firefox as my main web browser. It's faster and generally more efficient than Chrome plus it has the most important extensions. The most surprising thing is that the Android version of Firefox is excellent. So good that I switched from Chrome a few months ago when this expected news first dropped. No ads on mobile is awesome.

I've been trying to do this but for some odd reason it's really slow on Mac. Been trying to figure out why but I don't see any solutions. Perhaps someone here knows.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#390

Post by lightedman » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 6:01 PM UTC

Glyptodon wrote: post #178

lightedman wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your phone is probably one of the ones that came out with bad RAM and is defective, it works great on both my Moto Z Play and Moto G6 Play.

Do you have a link about this?

No, I'm a BGA repair tech that has had to deal with the bad RAM chips on that model of phone, among others.

The RAM will appear to pass hardware checking in our testers, but you hit it hard and suddenly the frequency becomes unstable, often dropping down to DDR1 speeds. Plenty of room for error, there.