No post body was provided.
“UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
191–200 of 271 posts
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do think there's a bit of sour grapes. You can only use the MV2 version until January. After that the main point to using the MV3 extension will be that it exists. I sort of like the idea of UBO Minus, regardless of whether they do a full MV3 version of UBO later. It's more private than UBO could ever be. If it's enough, it's actually quite a nice extension. Methinks a competitor ad blocker leaning into MV3 and cla…
> usershare is at risk My impression from way back in the uMatrix days was that marketshare is not a concern for gorhill and that the u* family are a labor of love to improve the internet for everyone.
Some folks still use uMatrix and wish uBlock had an advanced advanced mode to replace it :)
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#193If 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.
Please may i continue to use Brave?
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What would be the point of still requiring those broad permissions while losing features and the ability to innovate on extension-side matching algorithms The point would be to have those features, obviously? Cosmetic filtering is extremely important, there was never any possibility that MV3 was going to remove it, and you just removed it yourself for absolutely no reason. I'm sorry, but if you're just removing fea…
> removed it yourself for absolutely no reason I clearly stated the reason: to avoid having to require broad "read/modify data on all websites" permission. I purposefully decided to create a permission-less version of uBO for people who would rather not grant broad "read/modify data on all websites". > You're taking a single reason that they gave, two years ago The current documentation regarding the purpose of decla…
[deleted]
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't reasonable. Today on iPhone, even if you pay $100/year to be able to run unsigned code, you can't get a copy of Firefox running, because nobody maintains the port. That kind of crippling grasp on the ecosystem is difficult to tolerate, and simply nothing compared to what's going on with Google. Today with Pixel phones, you can secure boot third party OSes without even voiding your warranty. You can unlock…
Reading your comment, my final thought was that essentially if you want to maintain another computer, similar to your desktop, buy an Android phone. Research and install your ROM of choice, route it and install the programs you want, and you are responsible to make sure it all works. If you don’t want yet another computer to maintain consuming hours of your time, buy an iPhone. I do use Android for my streaming set t…
You aren't wrong in a technical sense but the amount of effort to make it work is really overstated here. It shouldn't take more than a few hours tops for everything you are describing, not including the time spent choosing the phone of course.
You have to compare it to the time lost with iOS as well, whether it's from missing apps/features or salary hours spent on the Apple ecosystem because of the lock-in.
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Maybe some of us are sick of Firefox fans taking this moralizing tone that we're somehow "damaging the cause" by simply speaking our mind when we disagree with your assessment. That doesn't make me a google shill, nor cynical. Just tired of the nonsense.
To steelman their argument, I'd say Google has grown so large and so controlling that literally anything that can provide a viable alternative should be cherished. Even if it's entity that is under questionable leadership like Mozilla.
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What would be the point of still requiring those broad permissions while losing features and the ability to innovate on extension-side matching algorithms The point would be to have those features, obviously? Cosmetic filtering is extremely important, there was never any possibility that MV3 was going to remove it, and you just removed it yourself for absolutely no reason. I'm sorry, but if you're just removing fea…
> removed it yourself for absolutely no reason I clearly stated the reason: to avoid having to require broad "read/modify data on all websites" permission. I purposefully decided to create a permission-less version of uBO for people who would rather not grant broad "read/modify data on all websites". > You're taking a single reason that they gave, two years ago The current documentation regarding the purpose of decla…
I initially punished a comment disagreeing with you, but after thinking about it more, I agree. Google's clearly signalled that they don't want Adblockers to use "read/write data on all websites"; just like Apple did, Chrome's whole idea with Manifest v3 was to make that go away. Frankly, with the genuinely malicious extensions people keep installing, probably for the best. Furthermore having uBlock Origin "continue to behave as normal" will confuse users and make them think uBO is still blocking everything users expect it to (i.e. tracking), which can surely endanger some users.
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google is an ad company. The logical strategy is embrace extend extinguish ad blocking. If your extension is getting attacked and stripped of functionality minimal investment in keeping it working likely to continue to work the longest is logical
Many people have responded to this argument across many different threads, but just to reiterate: this is just the exact opposite of true. Google's ads are very, very easy to block, and you could do it with a one-line chrome extension. The vast majority of complexity in ad blockers is required for other ads that live outside of Google's ecosystem. If you really believed that Google was making their MV3 changes based…
MV3 has zero privacy benefits as it doesn't stop the same extensions from snooping but it does force substantial limitations like not having a separate list separated from the extension itself and an artificial limitation on the size of its blocklist. It is not expected that mv3 immediately destroys all ad blocking but if you look at the fact that google already makes such impossible on mobile you can surmise that it is a likely step towards eliminating all adblocking in the future. Especially since they have so obviously lied to everyone about the motivation for the change.
The end game is adblocking that blocks "unacceptable" ads in the name of protecting you from content that is offensive, adult, malware, or experience destroyingly bad while allowing in offensive google ads. In the name of not getting sued select partners will be allowed to prove they apply the same standards and will be allowed to access your eyeballs.
Feel free to revisit this in 3-5 years when I'm obviously right.
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading your comment, my final thought was that essentially if you want to maintain another computer, similar to your desktop, buy an Android phone. Research and install your ROM of choice, route it and install the programs you want, and you are responsible to make sure it all works. If you don’t want yet another computer to maintain consuming hours of your time, buy an iPhone. I do use Android for my streaming set t…
You aren't wrong in a technical sense but the amount of effort to make it work is really overstated here. It shouldn't take more than a few hours tops for everything you are describing, not including the time spent choosing the phone of course. You have to compare it to the time lost with iOS as well, whether it's from missing apps/features or salary hours spent on the Apple ecosystem because of the lock-in.
Your second paragraph is a bit of a stretch in my humble opinion. Missing apps and features, on iOS? I see. And salary hours?
I was a long time android phone user. I used Cyanogenmod, which became Lineage. I was kind of left in a lurch once CM dropped support from my phone. Then I was using some truly obscure software. It doesn’t feel comfortable to use with banking apps.
There used to be a good handful of distinct advantages for Android on phones. But today if anything important is missing, it’s more likely be missing on Android. Outside of someone who really wants FF with UBO. For example, if you buy a Sonos sound bar and want to use the room adjustment software, it only exists on iOS. Sonos can’t guarantee the quality of the microphone used to enable the software for Android.
In regards to your first point, yes it may only take an hour or two if you know what you’re doing or have done it before. But most users are not going to be doing all of that on their phone.
For me, I found that chasing secure and up-to-date software on android ended up being like duplicating my desktop PC. And I say that as someone who is an Android fan. Just for certain use cases. And by no means a partisan in this whole debate. It’s really just my experience as a software developer that has spent five years or more on each platform.
I quite like the Samsung phones. If I went back, I would pick up one of those. I really like the Dex feature and the USB-C is mandatory. But there’s not much that personally draws me in from the points that you mentioned, the time and technical investment, any missing features or lock in.
Re: “UBO Minus (MV3)” – An Experimental uBlock Origin Build for Manifest V3
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reduce Motion in display or accessibility settings I think it’s called. I’m on M1. Just updated FF from the menu. I’m using the trackpad, but again, I changed my system settings, as I don’t like the default speed and acceleration.
Huh, yeah, turning on "Reduce motion" does indeed disable bounce scroll in Firefox. Definitely a strange choice on their part! (It doesn't affect it in other apps.) > I changed my system settings, as I don’t like the default speed and acceleration I see, that could make sense, if Safari was honoring those changes and Firefox wasn't, in some way. I've got mostly stock settings (slightly bumped up speed and three-finge…
> Huh, yeah, turning on "Reduce motion" does indeed disable bounce scroll in Firefox. Definitely a strange choice on their part! (It doesn't affect it in other apps.
The current safari bounce effect bounced ALL fixed elements when you bounce the page body. And by copy that. It basically make youtube(or probably any similierly designed website) unusable for anyone have motion sickness. Because the most part of UI is fixed. And hense it is part of "Reduce motion" setting.
Side notes: Safari agreed that bouncing fixed elements is a bug after Firefox implemented it. So this effect will probably be reverted later.