uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox • Hacker News Board

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#151

Post by matheusmoreira » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

openknot wrote: post #104

matheusmoreira wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only marketers love ads in general. To the rest of us, it's just annoying noise, to be filtered.

From an older submission to Hacker News: "Appreciate marketing. It seems like bullshit, but it’s bullshit I don’t want to have to do. I’m glad someone else is doing it, I’m sincerely grateful for their efforts." [0] Software development is important, but marketing is also important, and it actually works. Most companies can't survive without effective marketing. [0] https://devjac.dev/posts/2021-05-29-my-personal-cre…

> Appreciate marketing. It seems like bullshit, but it’s bullshit I don’t want to have to do.

Bullshit? To me it seems more like mind rape when a bunch of corporate ideas and brands are suddenly and forcibly injected into my mind. I didn't ask for it, I didn't consent to it. We don't tolerate it when people violate our bodies, so why is it okay to violate our minds? They "need" it to make money, so it's okay?

If I want to see products, I'll ask for it. I'll open the store app. Until that time, they better keep their marketing to themselves or I'll do everything in my power to defend myself. That's what software like uBlock Origin is: self-defense against hostile megacorporations who want to exploit you in every way possible.

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#152

Post by mariuz » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

Dear Mozilla.org please add it as default in the browser if you care about privacy and the web in general, This is the first add-on that I install on all computers , mine or for friends

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#153

Post by foo_barrio » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:46 PM UTC

toastercat wrote: post #62

How do ya'll feel about the idea that adblock can be morally equivalent to theft[1]? I see this argument pop up from time to time in relation to people who use alternative clients to services such as YouTube. But if you're using uBlock Origin, you are probably browsing many, many sites that rely at least partially on ad revenue, so it's a similar case. [1] https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/518154828166725632

If you argue that from the site's side then you can bring up that ads are taking up data, bandwidth(thus time) and battery (insane JS "game" ads) on the client side no?

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#154

Post by AlexandrB » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

toastercat wrote: post #62

How do ya'll feel about the idea that adblock can be morally equivalent to theft[1]? I see this argument pop up from time to time in relation to people who use alternative clients to services such as YouTube. But if you're using uBlock Origin, you are probably browsing many, many sites that rely at least partially on ad revenue, so it's a similar case. [1] https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/518154828166725632

I'd have more sympathy for this argument if ad-tech didn't consistently run roughshod over my preference not to be tracked. If ad-blockers are theft, trackers are stalking.

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#155

Post by npteljes » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

chii wrote: post #70

toastercat wrote: post #62

How do ya'll feel about the idea that adblock can be morally equivalent to theft[1]? I see this argument pop up from time to time in relation to people who use alternative clients to services such as YouTube. But if you're using uBlock Origin, you are probably browsing many, many sites that rely at least partially on ad revenue, so it's a similar case. [1] https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/518154828166725632

it is no more theft than smelling the cooking of a restaurant.

Not really. Imagine a restaurant which says, hey, here's this sample, it's free if you watch an ad while you eat. And then you eat, and specifically don't watch the ad. That's not just smelling the cooking, just like how reading an article is incurs traffic on a website, which the provider has to pay for somehow. Not to mention the procurement of the article.

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#156

Post by jeltz » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:49 PM UTC

superkuh wrote: post #46

Too bad modern Firefox doesn't actually have the support to run full featured uBlock Origin since they moved to the Chrome extensions model and threw away the entire Firefox add-on ecosystem. Actual Firefox forks like Sea Monkey and Palemoon still support the fully featured uBlock Origin.

You are confusing Chrome and Firefox. Firefox has no plans to remove the old api.

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#157

Post by rinze » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:50 PM UTC

Synaesthesia wrote: post #95

Really great on firefox for android too, along with YouTube background player.

I use Firefox on Android as a background YouTube player. Just open Youtube on Firefox, select the video you want to watch, lock the screen. The video will stop, but if you press 'play' in the dialog you get in the lock screen, it'll start playing again.

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#158

Post by GeekyBear » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:50 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #112

planetafro wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer DNS filtering over extensions as they generally want all permissions to essentially impersonate you at the browser level. Am I wrong?

You're not wrong. We're all placing immense amounts of trust in uBlock Origin. I often say that the blockers should be fully integrated into the browsers themselves in order to solve the trust problem. It's sad that it can't happen due to conflicts of interest.

Given that it's open source, we have the freedom to audit the code to make sure it's trustworthy.

Also, Mozilla has a vetting process it puts a popular subset of extensions through.

>Due to the curated nature of Recommended extensions, each extension undergoes a thorough technical security review to ensure it adheres to Mozilla’s add-on policies.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#159

Post by npteljes » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:51 PM UTC

toastercat wrote: post #62

How do ya'll feel about the idea that adblock can be morally equivalent to theft[1]? I see this argument pop up from time to time in relation to people who use alternative clients to services such as YouTube. But if you're using uBlock Origin, you are probably browsing many, many sites that rely at least partially on ad revenue, so it's a similar case. [1] https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/518154828166725632

I'm personally annoyed by ads so I block them.

But I see the point in the sentiment. People pay for advertisements to be seen. On the other hand, a good businessman calculates this into the cost - like if someone prints 1000 flyers, they are sure not every single one of them is read. Like it's part of the flyer business that many go into the bin without being looked at.

Re: uBlock Origin becomes top addon on Firefox

#160

Post by anonymousab » Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:52 PM UTC

toastercat wrote: post #62

How do ya'll feel about the idea that adblock can be morally equivalent to theft[1]? I see this argument pop up from time to time in relation to people who use alternative clients to services such as YouTube. But if you're using uBlock Origin, you are probably browsing many, many sites that rely at least partially on ad revenue, so it's a similar case. [1] https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/518154828166725632

It's as morally equivalent as muting the tv/changing the channel/averting your eyes or attention when a commercial comes on.

It only gets fuzzy when you start to argue about how surveillance capitalism let's them deny payment when ads are avoided on a Web browser but not when they are avoided with television. But "I don't get paid because they spy on you and the process more effectively than in other mediums" is already far more morally dubious.

And at the end of the day, brand or product awareness is only one part of the reason for an advertisement to exist - and the reason to pay for someone to run your ad. Another big part is an expectation that users will click on the ad, that they may buy the thing. So I take even more moral umbrage with content creators who show ads and argue that users should have to view them and are bad for not doing so even if they knowingly will not click or buy them; the content creator tacitly acknowledges that they are fine with only delivering part value to the advertiser while receiving payment in full. At that point it becomes "I am mad at my readers/viewers for being parasitical with me instead of helping me be parasitical with the advertiser" and any arguments about morals have become bunk.

So... unless they also demand that every user should fully read each ad and at least click on them in good faith with an open mind to open the wallet, I see it as a bit hypocritical to question the morality of Adblock users.