191–200 of 273 posts
Ad blocking is theft. Period.
Web pages are rendered by my web browser on my computer. Ad agencies do not have a right for their content to be forced upon me.
I decided to dump extension-based privacy stuff and installed Privoxy instead. I used to have Ghostery, Disconnect, ABP, and some other things running simultaneously. When you think about it, that's a lot of JS running and iterating the DOM multiple times every time you load a page. Now there's a single, purpose-built, standalone process written in C doing it. Not going back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But you can't, though. uBlock shows the total number of blocked items since you started Firefox. Not the number for a given page or site. Making it a basically superfluous mostly useless datapoint.
On Safari and Chrome, it displays the number of filters applied on the current site. This is (super) useful. If on Firefox you're getting a global count then that's a bug (so please report it on Github). Perhaps changing the color from red to something more "off" (grey?) would help distract less.
I get that a subset of users would derive some pleasure at knowing how many things are blocked on every single website they visit or users who'd like to use it to troubleshoot a specific page that doesn't load when blocking is enabled (in which case having a quick right-click toggle to turn it on so users can use it to troubleshoot would be ideal), but I'd wager that most users do not. Users that want it on can turn it on. (cue subset of users responding that they either 1. enjoy seeing the count or 2. use it to troubleshoot the rare page that doesn't load as a result of blocking)
I have been using µBlock for 3 weeks now.(previously adblock plus). There is one irritating thing it has that almost makes me go back to adblock again. It is often blocking the false positives. So if developer has named one of their assets file with social media names like "twitter/facebook/etc", it blocks the file right away. Since it does not have custom configuration options for each site, you can either disable µ…
µBlock enables Fanboy's social blocking list by default. If you want your Twitter/FB buttons and so forth back, you can turn it off in the subscription options.
I decided to dump extension-based privacy stuff and installed Privoxy instead. I used to have Ghostery, Disconnect, ABP, and some other things running simultaneously. When you think about it, that's a lot of JS running and iterating the DOM multiple times every time you load a page. Now there's a single, purpose-built, standalone process written in C doing it. Not going back.
Any issues connecting to sites over SSL using Privoxy? I'm thinking mainly of banking web-sites.
In fact the only issue I've ever had was building it an forgetting to enable threaded mode ..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Web pages are rendered by my web browser on my computer. Ad agencies do not have a right for their content to be forced upon me.
When are these ads being forced on you? When you willingly and knowingly visit content providers who make no secret of being supported by advertisements?
But aside from that, I've consented for the content provided by the content providers to execute in my browser. I did not extend the same consent to the ad agencies. If content providers wish to host the ad code, images, etc. on their own servers, then your argument starts to make sense. I would still argue that it's up to the content providers to publish whatever they see fit and it's my right as a consumer to control how the information they publish is assembled and presented to me on my machine. Not theirs.
If content providers were to host advertising materials on their own server, it would also make it harder to use ad networks for watering hole attacks and thus the internet would be more secure.
I use Privacy Badger, NoScript, and RequestPolicy to manage my browser's security, and EMET to help keep the rest of my system safe from the browser. I don't rely on AdBlock or any similar tools to achieve this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wah Chromium uses way more ram than Firefox. 425M (firefox+ublock) vs 1.04G (chromium+ublock) in all cases memory is reduced :)
I did warn on that page: > You can't compare directly the figures between the browsers Still, yes, Chromium uses more memory. A good part of this is because per-process tab. Once Firefox get the same per-process tab architecture, it will be easier to compare both browsers together.
I would like to see something akin to Ghostery's interface where I can see exactly what trackers/ads are hitting me at a site, and whitelist by domain.
When I last looked (at least two years ago) there wasn't a single blocker that supports a blacklist-only mode. Meaning: Allow everything unless I block a certain domain.
Does anyone have an idea if something like this exists now?