Live data from Hacker News

Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

extremetech.com

101–110 of 419 posts

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#101
post #90

I see nobody has posted it, so here is a very lightweight alternative - it redirects all known ad-hosting sites to 127.0.0.1 http://someonewhocares.org/hosts

Isn't it better to use something invalid (like 0.0.0.0) instead of 127.0.0.1? If you have a development server on your machine, rerouting ads to 127.0.0.1 means lots of useless requests...

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I'm a 'normal' user, having a 100 or so tabs open is actually idle time for me. When I'm busy it can be three times as much.

Three hundred tabs! Perhaps you might enjoy a cool feature called bookmarking. How do you keep track of them all? I get to 10 tabs before my Sheldon Cooper kicks in.

If I put them in a bookmark I'll likely never look at them again.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awww, looks like I have an unpopular opinion. You should totally censor it and make it disappear so that your world can be sterile and comfortable once again!

Nah, that fate should be reserved for Mozilla, apparently.

That would have made sense if I had said "kill them", but no...I said that I hope they go away. Kind of a big difference.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Awww, looks like I have an unpopular opinion. You should totally censor it and make it disappear so that your world can be sterile and comfortable once again!

Perhaps it's less about popularity and more your delivery.

I doubt it.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#106
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As my paranoia ramps up year on year, I now use Opera with µBlock. For me, it has the polish of Chrome with some nice extras, but without the increasingly creepy Googality. It works fine, although I've not tried µMatrix. (I have my defaults changed to DuckDuckGo. Usually connecting via a VPN.) I've whitelisted a few sites I like to support (a couple of webcomics, HaD etc). I have a lot of filters: "62,501 network fil…

http://www.howtotype.net/symbol/Micro/ Sadly, the US-International keyboard on Windows does not implement a shortcut for the "micro" character ( http://support.microsoft.com/kb/306560 ).

There's always character map which has this and like all others you can ever think of. A bit cumbersome, but at least one doesn't have to remember character codes and can search for characters by name.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#107
post #50

He's definitely on to something here, FF with a hundred or so tabs open: With ABP: 12961 XXXXXX 20 0 2615960 1.483g 58692 S 45.2 9.5 2:13.00 firefox Without: 13098 XXXXXX 20 0 2157212 1.109g 57476 R 142.6 7.1 1:26.25 firefox Both after a complete stop and start of the browser, restoring every tab by activating it.

This provides an engineering anecdote that adblocking is worth more than half a gig to a large fraction of the population. Looking at prices on tigerdirect you're dropping about $10 per gig (I'm sure apple charges $200 per gig for laptops, but they're price insensitive so don't matter). Anyway that provides a data point that ad blocking is worth at least $5 to the average user. Also from a scaling perspective I wonde…

"This provides an engineering anecdote that adblocking is worth more than half a gig to a large fraction of the population"

That's a reasonable conclusion only if people are aware that they're making the trade, which I suspect most users are not (otherwise this article would be rather boring)

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#108
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have data on Ghostery memory/CPU usage, but I would offer this warning: Ghostery is proprietary software, and is "calling home" on your usage when you enable Ghostrank. Ghostrank is used to build profiles on who is blocking what, and when, so they can sell this data to advertisers and trackers. Which just seems hypocritical to me. To be fair, Ghostrank is disabled, and opt-in by default. Instead, I think you…

It is not "calling home" if you enable the collection... Privacy Badger isn't nearly as effective as Ghostery. Regarding Ghostrank -- isn't it better that ad companies learn to create non-intrusive, acceptable ads so that we don't have to rely on adblockers everywhere and can actually give sites their ad-revenue?

I would prefer that ad companies learn to create non-intrusive ads. I've been hoping for this for the past 15 years. Sadly, no progress is being made here.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#109
post #96
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Youtube front page doesn't show any videos I see videos all fine on Youtube front-page, using out-of-the-box filter lists. That kind of issue was never reported for uBlock. I would need to know exactly what filter lists you were using, including custom filters. uBlock relies on 3rd-party filter lists to do the job, specifically, out of the box: - EasyList - EasyPrivacy - Fanboy's Social Blocking List - Peter Lowe's…

I haven't tried ublock yet, is it obvious how to work back from a broken page to figure out which blacklists need adjusting? I'd also recommend that the defaults should have YouTube and Facebook (at least) working out of the box. Otherwise I think people will just uninstall the plugin, rather than trying to figure out how to fix it, which would be a shame.

[deleted]

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#110
post #2

People are using µBlock now for precisely this reason. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/%C2%B5Block-vs.-ABP:-... https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/%C2%B5block/cjpalh... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Together with umatrix ( https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/ ) are the best chrome extensions Since I went back to firefox those are the only extensions I really miss, there is policeman ( https://github.com/futpib/policeman/ ) but it's not as good as them yet To whoever develop extensions, please don't focus only on chrome, firefox during the last months has become must better that it was before, if developers only c…

How does uMatrix compare to something like Ghostery? Would it be redundant to have both?
Post reply on HN