Live data from Hacker News

uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

github.com

141–150 of 317 posts

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#141
post #80

As others have said, it can also be done with a uBlock filter. For example, here are my filters that block and remove terrible copycats/translations of StackOverflow https://gist.github.com/quenhus/6bd2c47e5780f726f0c96c0a2ee7... . I hate these copies that somehow manage to be better referenced than StackOverflow.

This is amazing. I tried extending this to remove all pinterest results too (the real cancer of the internet) but the filter doesn't seem to be working.. Any tips? google.*##.g:has(a[href*="pinterest.*"])

And here’s the same thing for uBlacklist:

https://github.com/rjaus/ublacklist-pinterest/blob/main/ubla...

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#142
post #139

This looks great. Pinterest is not getting one more traffic from me. As someone who blogs sometimes, Pinterest has been a huge pain-point in finding images and attributing them properly. It was even sometimes impossible for me to determine the original source of an image and to find out whether or not it could be used in my blog for free. It was a huge pain for downloading images as well. (I have always downloaded pi…

My first thought as well.

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#144

The great cat and mouse game 1. uBlock - Blocks annoying ads 2. Sponsorblock - Blocks annoying nordvpn, curiositystream, et al 3. uBlacklist - Blocks annoying pinterest, quora, et al Keep the good fight going guys. Kudos!

Don't forget BlockTube, thanks to it I haven't seen a soyface thumbnail in over a year.

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#145
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could someone explain why they're hated? I don't know much about E3, but used them a few times without issue

I am not sure of the current state of affairs, but in the past (5-10 years ago or longer) w3schools was known for having outdated or sometimes flat out wrong information. They often rank or ranked higher than MDN which is usually the best and most comprehensive source on the subject. So a front end dev would typically want to always see MDN over w3schools.

pretty much.

their contents was never the best or most relevant back then. but they gamed SEO to position themselves higher than most. they are doing better today? good for them. for some of us who have witnessed the whole thing happen, they will be ignored for a long time.

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I always do banking/TDAM in Firefox safe mode. I'd rather be tracked (or even hacked by some malicious script through the bank's fault) by my bank, than hacked by an extension I installed, because I wouldn't have much liability in the former but I would in the prior.

You think they're going to accept liability just because it's their fault? In order to get that far they'd have to investigate and then find themselves at fault.

Of all the bad things banks do, not accepting liability for theft or loss of funds doesn't seem like a very common one. I've never had trouble with any bank reversing fraudulent transactions or withdrawals.

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#147
post #80

As others have said, it can also be done with a uBlock filter. For example, here are my filters that block and remove terrible copycats/translations of StackOverflow https://gist.github.com/quenhus/6bd2c47e5780f726f0c96c0a2ee7... . I hate these copies that somehow manage to be better referenced than StackOverflow.

Would you submit this to an the awesome list I’ve made for uBlacklist?

I love uBlacklist, but I felt the community aspect of it was missing, and vital to its success. I felt bootstrapping lists and GitHub repos was the most instantaneous way to enable a community.

I comment each time it hits HN, but beyond that haven’t seen much uptake / contribution towards building blacklists.

https://github.com/rjaus/awesome-ublacklist

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#148

I always wonder why doesn't Google gives users a personalization option similar to YT's "not interested" which could be used for ranking...? I understand they cannot simply block some website due to antitrust issues, but personalization would be a good rationale and also gives users a good reason to keep their sign-in status.

Because time and time again google insists it knows what we want better than we do.

Your argument doesn't make sense at all since even with that option Google is still in full control of what they want to show.

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#149
post #80

As others have said, it can also be done with a uBlock filter. For example, here are my filters that block and remove terrible copycats/translations of StackOverflow https://gist.github.com/quenhus/6bd2c47e5780f726f0c96c0a2ee7... . I hate these copies that somehow manage to be better referenced than StackOverflow.

This is amazing. I tried extending this to remove all pinterest results too (the real cancer of the internet) but the filter doesn't seem to be working.. Any tips? google.*##.g:has(a[href*="pinterest.*"])

It doesn't work because = is looking strictly for a substring, it doesn't do globbing. Something like [href="pinterest."] probably gets closer to what you're expecting.

Re: uBlacklist: Blocks specific sites from appearing in Google search results

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is amazing. I tried extending this to remove all pinterest results too (the real cancer of the internet) but the filter doesn't seem to be working.. Any tips? google.*##.g:has(a[href*="pinterest.*"])

It doesn't work because = is looking strictly for a substring, it doesn't do globbing. Something like [href ="pinterest."] probably gets closer to what you're expecting.

(use \* to escape the *)
Post reply on HN