uBlock Origin Lite: Description
github.com
uBlock Origin Lite: Description
1–10 of 155 posts
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#2I know there have been some threads about the mv3 uBO version recently, but this is a new, consise and imho good description by gorhill himself.
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#3[deleted]
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#4"Lite" is such a bad name, it's often a positive signifier that describes low resource usage/costs. It should have a more negative name, like uBlock Origin Reduced.
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#5"Lite" is such a bad name, it's often a positive signifier that describes low resource usage/costs. It should have a more negative name, like uBlock Origin Reduced.
It was indeed named "uBO Minus", but what do you expect from Google? Accept that name?
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#6"Lite" is such a bad name, it's often a positive signifier that describes low resource usage/costs. It should have a more negative name, like uBlock Origin Reduced.
It was indeed named "uBO Minus", but what do you expect from Google? Accept that name?
Why not name it uBO Neutrino?
It has the connotation of being "Lite" since they're low-mass particles. And it sounds vaguely like "neutered", which is what MV3 attempts to do to ad-blockers.
(That being said, this description from gorhill looks great.)
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#7"Lite" is such a bad name, it's often a positive signifier that describes low resource usage/costs. It should have a more negative name, like uBlock Origin Reduced.
The page itself mentions how it consumes less resources, and requires less permissions.
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#8Can't wait for the Chromium team to land the new permissions GUI so that all that whining around how MV3 is the end of uBlock Origin can stop. Many here will look silly overnight when that happens.
See here: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=113549...
> We have always intended to provide support for this functionality in Manifest V3 (for both user-installed and force-installed extensions), and have been iterating on different possible approaches. Our tentative plan (which is not yet finalized) is that the Manifest V3 version of this capability will require extensions to request a new permission scoped to intercepting authentication requests, but will otherwise allow extensions to handle these requests in a similar manner to how they do in Manifest V2.
> The permission string and end user facing warning string have not been finalized yet. Also, we have not yet finalized how this new permission will interact with other permission grants, but extensions that currently have the webRequest permission and broad host permissions will likely not require an additional grant for this permission.
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#9What happened to the name “uBO Minus”?
Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description
#10"Lite" is such a bad name, it's often a positive signifier that describes low resource usage/costs. It should have a more negative name, like uBlock Origin Reduced.
>... it's often a positive signifier that describes low resource usage/costs
Third sentence:
>This means that uBOL itself does not consume CPU/memory resources while content blocking is ongoing -- uBOL's service worker process is required only when you interact with the popup panel or the option pages.