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

uBlock Origin Lite: Description

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 155 posts

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#111

Post by stuartd »

runjake wrote: post #69
baal80spam wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bet he should! To me, there are 3 projects I'd throw my money to: - uBlock Origin - ytdl - The Internet Web Archive

But, do you donate? https://archive.org/donate?origin=wbwww-TopNavDonateButton (Couldn't find links for uBo and ytdl. I've asked gorhill where to donate in the past and they've refused donations.)

From the uBlock repo: [0]

> No donations sought.

> Without the preset lists of filters, this extension is nothing. So if ever you really do want to contribute something, think about the people working hard to maintain the filter lists you are using, which were made available to use by all for free.

[0] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#112

Post by chlorion »

yyyk2 wrote: post #47
vntok wrote: post #8

Can'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 hav…

Why even pretend like MV3 isn't meant to cripple adblockers so Google can extract more revenue from their advertisement business?

Do we have any evidence to support these claims?

If Google actually wanted to cripple adblockers, why wouldn't just ban them outright and remove addons used for adblocking purposes from the Chrome extension store, or completely remove APIs that allow for content blocking? Why would they develop a new extension API that still allows you to block ads at all?

Why isn't it possible that the new APIs might have actual benefits and exist for legitimate reasons?

I understand that companies suck and exist solely to serve themselves, and I fully support being skeptical, but I think users here are way too quick to jump on the hate train and start slinging FUD. Maybe you are right and Google is trying to cripple adblockers, but I'm not so sure yet and would like to see others at least consider an alternative perspective.

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#113

Post by tyingq »

nightpool wrote: post #68

I'm really happy that Gorhill has listened to feedback on the branding and explanation of this, and added back in the ability to "opt in" to extended permissions on individual sites. Thank you for your work, and I'm sorry if my comments in the preview HN thread came off as overly hostile, because given the original comments you made about MV3, I couldn't imagine this sort of outcome. I hope that you or someone else s…

"And I'm still worried that without an MV3-compatible version of full uBlock Origin, users are still going to assume that "MV3 means that ad blockers are broken"

I mean, they are hobbled. If you think of it like a malware scanner, it's the equivalent of taking away all heuristics and relying solely on big lists of payload checksums or "bad words".

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#114

Post by propogandist »

saxonww wrote: post #110
bornfreddy wrote: post #66

I'm really really really hoping that the non-crippled version, which works in Firefox, doesn't die the way uMatrix did (loved it, still miss it). That said, huge thanks to gorhill and all the others working on this project!

Note: uMatrix is not dead, it's just no longer updated. It's still available from the Chrome web store and Firefox add-ons sites. I am using it in Firefox right now, it still works as well as it always has.

it’s not dead and works well, but wont survive the Manifest V3 changeover. It’s the most important extension out there for the savvy web explorer

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#115

Post by skykooler »

runjake wrote: post #69
baal80spam wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You bet he should! To me, there are 3 projects I'd throw my money to: - uBlock Origin - ytdl - The Internet Web Archive

But, do you donate? https://archive.org/donate?origin=wbwww-TopNavDonateButton (Couldn't find links for uBo and ytdl. I've asked gorhill where to donate in the past and they've refused donations.)

I don't donate directly, but I check the box to donate them a dollar every time I buy something with PayPal.

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#116

Post by novok »

webmobdev wrote: post #78
novok wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just won't work that well. Recently in the past few months I've been noticing more and more ads with safari style content blockers, while ublock style continue to work fine. I fear this style of 'adblock' will have similar issues.

Switch to Orion browser - https://browser.kagi.com/ - it's a Safari / webkit clone with built-in uBlock Origin.

Yeah i use brave which does something similar.

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#117

Post by novok »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #61
novok wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My question is why have limits

Unbounded lists rarely seems like a thoughtful way to start out. But there are probably some DX and UX improvements over unbounded lists. e.g. recompilation takes time, so you set up developers for better UX when their dynamic lists are shorter and separate from their static lists, and they can compile multiple lists at once. (A 50k rule list took seconds on my old Macbook Air). Also encourages breaking lists into lo…

The entire living under the grace of the vendor-king to have permission to modify your own experience is fairly onerous on it's own.

And before you say, but app store review!, I also think that is bad too.

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#118

Post by thayne »

tyingq wrote: post #113
nightpool wrote: post #68

I'm really happy that Gorhill has listened to feedback on the branding and explanation of this, and added back in the ability to "opt in" to extended permissions on individual sites. Thank you for your work, and I'm sorry if my comments in the preview HN thread came off as overly hostile, because given the original comments you made about MV3, I couldn't imagine this sort of outcome. I hope that you or someone else s…

"And I'm still worried that without an MV3-compatible version of full uBlock Origin, users are still going to assume that "MV3 means that ad blockers are broken" I mean, they are hobbled. If you think of it like a malware scanner, it's the equivalent of taking away all heuristics and relying solely on big lists of payload checksums or "bad words".

But even worse than that, because you have a limit on how big that list can be.

Otoh, with full permissions it can still do things like hide ads that aren't blocked by the declaritive rules. But, to continue the analogy, that's like killing a process after it's doing malicious stuff instead of preventing it from running in the first place.

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#119

Post by thayne »

comfypotato wrote: post #77
longtimelistnr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason is that it is not a direct source of course because the authors cannot be validated. Never met a college professor that said don’t use Wikipedia (if anything it was encouraged) as long as you’re pulling from the citations. I had plenty of high school teachers talk about how awful it is though and I think it was because they just didn’t understand it

I'll take this a step further to say that my graduate algorithms professor assigned Wikipedia articles as reading. The parent blanket statements are just that: overgeneralizations.

My undergrad physics professors didn't exactly assign wikipedia articles, but they did tell us that some articles were useful resources for understanding certain topics. In my experience, the more technical a topic, the more likely the wikipedia article is to be reliable. Probably because there isn't much incentive for someone who isn't an expert to edit it.

Re: uBlock Origin Lite: Description

#120

Post by thayne »

LegitShady wrote: post #104
throwaway64643 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha. This reminds me of a Redditor's story. Despite having no money to afford professional hardware, he still managed to take good astronomy photos using his phone. In one of his posts, his photos impressed a "kind stranger" so much that they gifted him one of the most expensive Reddit awards, whose value can buy him a third of his desired gear.

pretty sure the most expensive reddit award is worth $120, which isn't a down-payment on an equatorial drive. It might pay for 1/3 of an IR conversion on an existing DSLR camera, maybe. professional astronomy photos is an activity where the low end starts very expensive. Basic setups are in the thousands of dollars.

If you are imaging bright objects like planets or the moon, you don't need an equatorial drive. Especially if you are using a "fast" telescope.
Post reply on HN