101–110 of 248 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox on android did have the option to have ublock as an extension (luckily)
Yeah, which is why I stick with it even though they just butchered a few areas of the UI (most notably the home screen). Fortunately they seem to be listening to reviews and fixing things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't slack look at the size of a gif and skip playing it if it's bigger than 4mb or something? I'm reminded of Steve Jobs comment on 'toner heads' and why Xerox failed. Google is now run by MBA's and Ad people. So they will continue to do things like this.
It does, but the Slack servers still need to download the image first to know it’s size. There’s no equivalent for a browser. You could rely on Content-Length headers but then ad servers are just going to stop sending them.
Or giving users in Chrome a Report Button that then filtered into site rankings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about restricting the frame rate of all elements until some heuristic determines that the user has interacted with them?
Restricting framerate will still download the 100mb GIF. Also, so many parts of websites use gifs and canvas. If you start blocking those, you'll be hiding loading spinners, menus and more. You're adding ton and ton of complexity and going at war after something pretty silly. If a website is abusive and does shitty things, just don't use the website. After some point, it's no longer the browsers job to babysit the we…
What do you do if the aforementioned is not done by the website as such, but by some omnipresent, and hard to avoid 3rd party ad net?
> After some point, it's no longer the browsers job to babysit the web. I completely agreed with autoplaying audio, but blocking video is just not worth it.
Video is by far the heaviest piece of media out there. There is no practical means to reduce its loading time, especially on mobile. It simply cannot be considered an ordinary piece of page content.
Lastly, people are sick and tired of video ads, and, particularly, obscene, bombastic, and blinking like no tomorrow ones.
(disclaimer: I work at Google, not on Chrome) The rationale here seems to be that by blocking video autoplay, Chrome incentivized sites shipping huge animated GIFs, or decoding video in JS and painting to canvas, both of which are very suboptimal for users. Another comment points to this issue: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=106364... quote: Unfortunately, full autoplay blocking is counter prod…
Then maybe the solution is to also have the option turn off animated GIFs and perhaps frequent canvas repaints too; and not simply give up completely ! In any case, just leaving the option alone so at least it has some effect like it did before, would still be better than essentially a full surrender.
Now I'm looking for a gif and canvas blocker for FF mobile. Any hints on how to tune uBO?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then maybe the solution is to also have the option turn off animated GIFs and perhaps frequent canvas repaints too; and not simply give up completely ! In any case, just leaving the option alone so at least it has some effect like it did before, would still be better than essentially a full surrender.
This is infact a common feature on smaller browsers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. I've turned my wife, daughter, and Mom, none of whom are tech oriented at all, into Brave converts on mobile.
Unfortunately, that helps exactly zilch. Brave, along with all other Blink/Chromium based browsers and frameworks, further entrenches Chrome as the platform. Either use Firefox on Android or give up. For desktop, you have at least Firefox, Otter Browser, and Epiphany as options.
Now as a reply to this specific comment, I've tried Firefox multiple times on Android and always hated it. So I obviously can't advocate people use something I hate. But I do wish there were more...options.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about restricting the frame rate of all elements until some heuristic determines that the user has interacted with them?
Restricting framerate will still download the 100mb GIF. Also, so many parts of websites use gifs and canvas. If you start blocking those, you'll be hiding loading spinners, menus and more. You're adding ton and ton of complexity and going at war after something pretty silly. If a website is abusive and does shitty things, just don't use the website. After some point, it's no longer the browsers job to babysit the we…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about restricting the frame rate of all elements until some heuristic determines that the user has interacted with them?
Restricting framerate will still download the 100mb GIF. Also, so many parts of websites use gifs and canvas. If you start blocking those, you'll be hiding loading spinners, menus and more. You're adding ton and ton of complexity and going at war after something pretty silly. If a website is abusive and does shitty things, just don't use the website. After some point, it's no longer the browsers job to babysit the we…