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

231–240 of 271 posts

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

#231

Post by simondotau »

leni536 wrote: post #206
simondotau wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> it was bad technology Was it really?

Heck yes. This shouldn't even be a controversial statement. Flash was famous for its seemingly perpetual conga line of serious security vulnerabilities. It laughed at the browser security model. The web is a much, much, much, much, much better place because it was forced to die.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash_Player#Security

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

#232

Post by simondotau »

jchw wrote: post #203
simondotau wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The outcomes are definitely less of a win for the open web in many cases. It is astounding that I have to deal with Apple proponents unironically trying to argue that WebM and Opus are bad things. Of course Safari on iOS supports Opus, but it just doesn't support it in any standard container... which is one of the most pointless things I can think of. Wikimedia doesn't care. They just load a polyfill with WebAssembly…

I don't disagree that support for open codecs should be more of a priority for Apple/Safari/WebKit. But you're missing the bigger picture. The web should be resilient to clients which don't support all of the latest features. It shouldn't be necessary to be using a bleeding edge version of Google Chrome (or its clones) in order to have a first class web browsing experience.

While one might complain about the inconvenience of supporting the few gaps in Safari on iOS, this complaint is actually of having to support people who don't (or can't) run the latest software because they (for example) haven't chosen to pay money to upgrade their computing device to something which supports Windows 10 or a recent release of MacOS.

The fact that Safari on iOS isn't bleeding edge is actually an under-appreciated gift to people who choose to/are forced to run older software. It's one of the last vectors forcing lazy web developers (i.e. most web developers) to continue taking browser diversity seriously.

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

#233

Post by boltzmann-brain »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #190
simondotau wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Came to mention that you don't need a rooted Android to run uBlock Origin, SponsorBlock, Enhancer for YouTube, Augmented Steam, Decentraleyes, I Don't Care About Cookies, Violentmonkey, or Darkreader... you just need FF Nightly:

https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-ad...

Note one thing, if your collection name contains spaces, you need to use the hyphenated version - basically the url segment that is in the collection's url when viewing it in the browser. That's not said in the article and it wasted some time for me.

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

#234

Post by dirkf »

clumsysmurf wrote: post #36
horsawlarway wrote: post #23

I approve (of both the release and the name). I see plenty of folks in here lamenting this release at all - in the hopes that the lack of it will push folks to Firefox. It won't. Those who care about this are already on Firefox, and frankly - Firefox isn't going to be the answer here (to be clear, this is opinion). I'm also not thrilled at manifest v3, although for very different reasons than the adblocking limitatio…

> I do lots of extension development Off topic, but since you seem experienced at this, do you recommend any resources for extension development for someone that's beginning from scratch with no experience in this area?

Wladimir Palant (original creator Adblock Plus and nowadays doing security work with a focus on browser extensions) has recently started a blog series on browser extension security: https://palant.info/2022/08/10/anatomy-of-a-basic-extension/

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

#235

Post by account42 »

Dalewyn wrote: post #208
ethbr0 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing that ever gets mass migration is substantial superiority in features they use. Originally, it was tabbed browsing, which Opera and Mozilla had ~5 years before IE. Yes, Microsoft sucked that much in those days. With Chrome, it was an embedded PDF viewer and V8 performance. So essentially, mostly people don't switch browsers unless there's a very good reason to do so.

This comment is perhaps the most accurate take on the fall of IE. Firefox dethroned IE not because it was "MuH fReE oPeN sOuRcE sOfTwArE" or "MuH nEtScApE", it was because Firefox was superior to IE in performance and feature set. It was better than IE at being practical and enabling users to do things they needed or wanted to do. Shortly after, Chrome rolled around and it was superior in performance (RAM hogginess a…

Which is probably why Google is pushing for so many web extensions - to make sure that they stay ahead of everyone else and you need billions just to catch up.

Unfortunately it seems Firefox is falling into the trap and is desparately trying to chase Chrome instead of focusing on significant user experience innovations to distinguish themselves from Chrome, especially ones that Google is unwilling to add to Chrome.

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

#236

Post by krono »

tpxl wrote: post #221
plaguepilled wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube ads directly try to game the users attention. This is distinct from regular advertising (billboards et al) because your engagement directly and quickly affects what ads are served to you. People who have particular sensitivity to attention changes ('attention deficit' might be a term for it, but there are other ways it can manifest) are going to be affected disproportionately by this, even if they don't dispr…

> This is distinct from regular advertising (billboards et al) because your engagement directly and quickly affects what ads are served to you. This is exactly the same as TV and radio ads have been for decades now. Which ad is served is not at all relevant. > You can make the case that 'if you can't handle YouTube ads, don't go on YouTube', but then that runs counter to a lot of YouTube's content marketing and brand…

> Take some damned personal responsibility

Get rid of that wheelchair, just walk like a normal person!

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

#237

Post by Semaphor »

pmontra wrote: post #220
gorhill wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 use cosmetic filtering a lot on Firefox Android. I routinely remove all the sticky-ish headers and footers from sites I visit often, because they are distracting, sometimes move, appear and disappear and uselessly take away space and distract me. Some popups too, even on Firefox desktop. I'm sure that there are other extensions doing that (Stylish? but the element picker of uBlock origin is extremely quick to use)…

Note that they

> have decided to […] continue maintaining support for blocking webRequest

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

#238

Post by Semaphor »

Arnavion wrote: post #227
pmontra wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do keep using uMatrix. Its matrix UI is a nearly perfect. I also use uBlock Origin and I can't understand how to achieve the same results with the mini-matrix in its UI. ++ -- ??? It lacks the columns that explain what you're blocking or allowing. I read the documentation more than once and I still don't understand how to use it. Maybe I lack the incentive because uMatrix still works and it's so much better at that…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26284124

TL;DR: There is no proper UI, and it’s only usable if you either use the uM tables infrequently or feel like writing rules by hand all the time.

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

#239

Post by redox99 »

cycomanic wrote: post #106
redox99 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find firefox on android unusable because it has this awful, non-native scroll behavior. On android I use either Brave or Samsung Browser.

What do you mean by non-native scroll behavior? I'm asking seriously, never noticed anything.

I just retested in case they fixed it and no [1]. The easiest way to tell it's non-native scroll is that Android has this effect when you reach the top or bottom that it "stretches" the content. You can try it everywhere (even inside Firefox settings menu) and it will work like that, except for the actual webpage in Firefox.

Another difference in the scroll is that it has much higher friction (deceleration) in Firefox than native Android.

[1] Firefox 103.2.0 on a Samsung S20 with latest updates.

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

#240

Post by redox99 »

thecosmicfrog wrote: post #179
redox99 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find firefox on android unusable because it has this awful, non-native scroll behavior. On android I use either Brave or Samsung Browser.

Have you used Firefox for Android recently? That scroll issue was fixed with the release of GeckoView, at least from what I've noticed.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32764141
Post reply on HN