Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 271 posts

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#181

Post by BuckRogers »

tyingq wrote: post #130
horsawlarway wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you can already work around adblockers by just serving ads directly from your own servers. Frankly - you can also move to a service that implements adblocking at a different layer (I've seen an explosion of dns based adblockers as a service, likely inspired by the likes of pi-hole). Those services are using roughly the same feature set that's still available in m3. The big dealbreaker (imo) was the inability to c…

>But you can already work around adblockers by just serving ads directly from your own servers The available heuristics in UBO can block those with many different techniques today, especially for a short list of very popular sites. I assume many of them stop working with MV3. I'm aware of the DNS based adblockers, what I'm saying is that the advertisers might take action on all of them once the best option is hobbled…

Your idea results in a glorious day for Mozilla Firefox indeed. But I think you have to look even further down the line, assuming your future does play out as you described. And then all you have to look at is what we have today with Brave. Building in their own ad blockers that don’t rely on MV3 at all. Chromium-based browsers like it will have a market of their own.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#182

Post by midoridensha »

uneekname wrote: post #75
blibble wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was fully in the Google world prior to gorhill's posts on manifest v3 as a direct result the only thing I have left is a pixel phone, which will be going with the new iPhone (and in the meantime my entire family has been 'helpfully' migrated too) I may be up the extreme end of the distribution, but this sort of grassroots push is what dethroned IE, and the resultant loss of control of the web eliminated Microsoft's…

IMO Firefox on an Android is better than anything you can get on iOS. It fully supports uBlock Origin! I also use a Pixel phone, though I use LineageOS so I feel less tied to Google

I find Firefox on Android to completely unusable for many of the sites I visit because it doesn't support the Google Translate plugin for some completely idiotic reason. I can only use it on sites that are in English. For everything else, I have to use Chrome.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#183

Post by atdrummond »

ibejoeb wrote: post #178
atdrummond wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comments on that bug are depressing as well. I generally am involved in much more niche development communities - is this kind of disrespectful back and forth the standard these days?

People are kinda bitter about this. You can design around it, but it makes a lot of things way bigger jobs than they should be. I was just explaining my way around this one today. You port from v2 to v3 and all of a sudden it's basically a rewrite to make everything datum serializable and every function re-entrant because you never know when chrome is going kill your process. At this point, it's just the way it is no…

Oh, I understand the bitterness around Manifest and a lot of it is justifiable.

I was referring to the two developers (both seemingly not Google/Chromium affiliated) arguing about a workaround involving an “injectable tab” and taking pot shots at one another’s comprehension and ability.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#184

Post by SquareWheel »

gorhill wrote: post #151
SquareWheel wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be confirming nightpool's comment. That this is an intentionally-limited release. I think that's fine. It's good to have an adblocker that uses minimal permissions. But it seems like people will use this to argue that MV3 is less capable than it really is. Maybe UBO Plus (MV3) will come later that enables those feature.

It can never be "plus" compared to what uBO is currently with MV2, there are features and capabilities that can't be ported to MV3.

I understand that, but it seems like the most frequently-used features (eg. cosmetic filtering) are possible in MV3. So a version with those features included would still offer value.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems most of the missing capabilities are power user features - even by HN standards.

It's of course your discretion if that's something you wish to work on. I think a Minus and Plus version (or "Regular" if you prefer) offer a nice option for users to choose between. But I understand if the development overhead of managing two versions cannot be justified.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#185

Post by SquareWheel »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #180
nightpool wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Considering this is stated in ManifestV3's announcement and that no APIs have been made for it I'll admit—when I first made this comment, I assumed (based on the initial manifest v3 draft) that this change only affected privileged context execution, and did not affect execution in the "main world", outside of privileged extension contexts. That said, APIs HAVE been made for it, and it would still be possible to do…

"Source" he asks as the perpetually incompetent and straight up evil Chrome team deletes powerful APIs with no good replacement that just so happen to be the exact ones that blocks Google's extensive data collection and tracking. Feel free to be in denial about why those crippled APIs have come to be.

See that's just completely wrong. Google Ads are trivial to block with declarativeNetRequest. They're as plain jane simple as it gets. If any ad company will benefit, it'll be the exotic ones that are more difficult to block.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#186

Post by simondotau »

chii wrote: post #161
jchw wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to burst your bubble but if you are leaving the Android ecosystem because of Chrome manifest v3 I definitely urge you to see what you're getting yourself into. Not only does Apple enforce that you use their browser engine, it also abuses this position to disable features that they keep enabled on desktop Safari where users have an actual browser engine choice. Also, Safari imposes limitations on extensions that a…

> I spent years hoping for Apple to see the light, allow other browser engines as soon as apple tried to remove flash, they've shown their hand tbh. While it was generally considered good, the ideology behind removal of flash is the same ideology for their policy to not allow other browser engines.

Strong disagree here. Flash represented a proprietary takeover of web standards. It was bad technology with a bad license and had bad consequences. Apple’s ideology resulted in a pure gain for the open web.

Apple’s dictatorial control over browser engines on iOS represents, somewhat ironically, the last significant defense in the cause of browser engine diversity. While Apple’s motives might be less pure here, the outcomes are no less of a win for the open web.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#187

Post by solardev »

jchw wrote: post #156
blibble wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was fully in the Google world prior to gorhill's posts on manifest v3 as a direct result the only thing I have left is a pixel phone, which will be going with the new iPhone (and in the meantime my entire family has been 'helpfully' migrated too) I may be up the extreme end of the distribution, but this sort of grassroots push is what dethroned IE, and the resultant loss of control of the web eliminated Microsoft's…

Not to burst your bubble but if you are leaving the Android ecosystem because of Chrome manifest v3 I definitely urge you to see what you're getting yourself into. Not only does Apple enforce that you use their browser engine, it also abuses this position to disable features that they keep enabled on desktop Safari where users have an actual browser engine choice. Also, Safari imposes limitations on extensions that a…

How does content blocking in iOS Safari (like with Adguard) work? Is it any better or worse than Chrome with manifest v3?

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#188

Post by stonogo »

nightpool wrote: post #121
stonogo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are conflating a "present/absent" question of this permission with Google's stated intent. The key modifier here is broad "read/modify data" permission. If an extension attempts to assert that permission across a user's entire traffic, the extension will not be permitted in the store. Google's been very clear on this and it's already caused problems for other extensions. Furthmore the webRequest API has been nerf…

> If an extension attempts to assert that permission across a user's entire traffic, the extension will not be permitted in the store. Google's been very clear on this and it's already caused problems for other extensions. Do you have a source for this? Have other ad blocking extensions been removed from the store? I find it very hard to believe that Google would block uBlock over something so clearly and obviously r…

I can't provide a source for Google axing a too-invasive extension, because they've never been straightforward about it. My favorite excuse was that the extension's description was "too detailed."

As for the other, here you go: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#iss...

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#189

Post by viraptor »

ianlevesque wrote: post #60
driverdan wrote: post #4

If you're still using Chrome now is the time to switch to Firefox. This is an interesting experiment but the only solution is to stop using Chrome.

Firefox still isn't a suitable Chrome replacement. Chrome may be beaconing half your browsing data back to Mountain View quietly in the background, but Firefox shoves its monetization strategy right in your face every time you open a new tab (Pocket, VPN ads, etc). Firefox is also drastically more complex in the UI and menus, and is missing a lot of UX niceties in the window and address bar itself (extra clicks to se…

If the feature you're listing here is searching across all tabs... I think it's perfectly fine. Both have features not available in the other one.

> Mozilla has no one to blame but Mozilla for where Firefox isn't in terms of market share.

I think you should read up on how Chrome was/is advertised, how is pushed to users and what marketing channels and resources Google has.

Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3

#190

Post by Dylan16807 »

simondotau wrote: post #186
chii wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I spent years hoping for Apple to see the light, allow other browser engines as soon as apple tried to remove flash, they've shown their hand tbh. While it was generally considered good, the ideology behind removal of flash is the same ideology for their policy to not allow other browser engines.

Strong disagree here. Flash represented a proprietary takeover of web standards. It was bad technology with a bad license and had bad consequences. Apple’s ideology resulted in a pure gain for the open web. Apple’s dictatorial control over browser engines on iOS represents, somewhat ironically, the last significant defense in the cause of browser engine diversity. While Apple’s motives might be less pure here, the ou…

They could allow firefox though. Wouldn't that be entertaining.
Post reply on HN