21–30 of 155 posts
"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?
"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.
If you titled an adblocker "uBlock Crippled Edition", you might be protesting Google, but the unfamiliar end-user is just going to see it and think, "Well I certainly don't want a crippled adblocker! Let me just grab one of these numerous others from the appstore that claims it's 100% effective."
Isn't the biggest problem with MV3 the 5000 rule limit? Or are there ways around that by compiling it into something internal? This is how adguard did it: https://adguard.com/en/blog/adguard-mv3.html I'd suggest stop trying to support chrome and let it die? It won't work on mobile anyway, only Firefox supports ublock origin on mobile?
Not really, the bigger problems come from the removal without alternative of a number of useful primitives that uBlock Origin used for blocking. See https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338 for a detailed accounting of the changes and their impacts.
Gorhill should have a statue somewhere for making the web browseable.
"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 problem is that something pejorative on the surface is only meaningful to an end-user that is intimately familiar with the limitations of ManifestV3. If you titled an adblocker "uBlock Crippled Edition", you might be protesting Google, but the unfamiliar end-user is just going to see it and think, "Well I certainly don't want a crippled adblocker! Let me just grab one of these numerous others from the appstore th…
You don't need to be "intimately familiar" with the limitations of ManifestV3, a casual understanding, from perhaps an explanatory note in the description of the extension, is sufficient to understand such a name.
I have 3 extensions and each one has multiple feature-breaking changes that will take hundreds of hours to implement less than ideal work arounds. I guess I'll focus on SnipCSS (https://www.snipcss.com) because that's the only one I have paying customers.
For people who do manage the upgrade, at least we can look forward to less competition in the Chrome Web Store?
"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.
Isn't the biggest problem with MV3 the 5000 rule limit? Or are there ways around that by compiling it into something internal? This is how adguard did it: https://adguard.com/en/blog/adguard-mv3.html I'd suggest stop trying to support chrome and let it die? It won't work on mobile anyway, only Firefox supports ublock origin on mobile?
The current limit is 30,000 rules, but they've talked about raising it further beyond that point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that something pejorative on the surface is only meaningful to an end-user that is intimately familiar with the limitations of ManifestV3. If you titled an adblocker "uBlock Crippled Edition", you might be protesting Google, but the unfamiliar end-user is just going to see it and think, "Well I certainly don't want a crippled adblocker! Let me just grab one of these numerous others from the appstore th…
> The problem is that something pejorative on the surface is only meaningful to an end-user that is intimately familiar with the limitations of ManifestV3. You don't need to be "intimately familiar" with the limitations of ManifestV3, a casual understanding, from perhaps an explanatory note in the description of the extension, is sufficient to understand such a name.
"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.
I agree, uBlock Origin Minus was a better name. "Lite" is carrying water for Google.