631–640 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. 90% of users won't notice a difference. Here's the feature diff. [0] [0] https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
> Not really. Straight from the FAQ you linked: In general, uBOL will be less effective at dealing with websites using anti-content blocker or minimizing website breakage. Sooo... yes really?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think people should be able to do whatever they want on their own machine. If the setting is there, then let me use it for whatever extension I see fit. Sure, make it harder to do so, but don't treat users like children. I can't even screenshot banking apps on my own damn Android phone now.
Do you think Firefox should let me install an unsigned extension?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then they wouldn't be throwing money into open firepits on trash like a VPN service or how to comply with Google's advertising decisions. Then they would let people contribute money to the browser (instead of to Mozilla Foundation which goes to enabling aforementioned trash fires) and to the salary of a multi-million dollar CEO after laying off developer staff and hiring more C-suite assistants. Mozilla is a bad orga…
> Then they would let people contribute money to the browser People keep saying things like this, but the truth is that direct contributions to any ad-supported system contribute more like 1%-10% (at best) of their income. You are not the majority you think you are.
Now that's not some optional donation scheme, there are real tangible benefits to being a paid subscriber, so idk how that could fit into something like Firefox.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari content blockers are awful compared to UBlock and I’m a Safari user. Not only does YouTube either get through or cause weird issues, YouTube now blocks you until you completely disable the extension. Content blockers often block cookie banners too which can often result in broken functionality - a nightmare when you’re trying to buy tickets to something and have to “reload without blockers” for the website to…
Suggest using a service like NextDNS or Pi-hole for DYI ad blocking at the DNS/network level. I started with pi-hole but the hassle of updates and most importantly not having it available outside of my home network pushed me to a service like NextDNS which works on any network (5G, work, etc)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whataboutism is so lazy.
It's not whataboutism. If the claim is that google's actions with manifest v3 is "abusing its market position to their own benefit", but Apple did the same thing when it didn't stand to benefit from it, then it severely undermines that claim. Sure, it doesn't rule out google was secretly intending on doing it, only internal memos or whatever can prove that definitively. But at the same time, to immediately conclude t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari content blockers are awful compared to UBlock and I’m a Safari user. Not only does YouTube either get through or cause weird issues, YouTube now blocks you until you completely disable the extension. Content blockers often block cookie banners too which can often result in broken functionality - a nightmare when you’re trying to buy tickets to something and have to “reload without blockers” for the website to…
If I go to buy something, I switch off ad blocking on that page, at the very least, on the checkout page. Ads can even be actually relevant there. If the page is too ad-ridden to tolerate, I may consider to just close that page, and go search for other options. I use Firefox + uBlock Origin, because going to the wide commercial internet without some form of ad blocking is like going out without an umbrella when it's…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Nobody could have possibly seen it coming that Google would abuse its market position to their own benefit... Doesn't Safari have the same restriction, also ostensibly for "security/privacy" reasons? The only difference is that Apple doesn't have a web advertising presence, so you can't make the accusation that they're "abuse its market position to their own benefit".
And ublock origin lite works just fine for me
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't have been a bait and switch then.
So it's impossible for a company to make a mistake and rectify it? If they settle on the same approach as their major competitor, it's bait and switch?
Consider discontinuing the use of Google, AWS/Amazon, X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and ChatGPT if you value freedom. There are numerous excellent alternatives available.