I'd love to hear the side-effects of using Disconnect.
AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
141–150 of 270 posts
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#142It's not just memory overhead, it is also CPU overhead. One approach is to write the filtering engine from scratch. It is what I did, without looking at ABP's code beforehand in order to ensure a clean slate mind. I didn't get it right the first time, I did spend quite a large amount of time benchmarking, measuring, prototyping, etc. Once I was satisfied I had finally had a solid code base, I went and benchmarked it…
Having all my keystrokes sent to Google is the main reason why I don't use Chrome.
Can this app guard against it, ie only send my keystrokes to Google only when I enter a Google URL?
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#143It's not just memory overhead, it is also CPU overhead. One approach is to write the filtering engine from scratch. It is what I did, without looking at ABP's code beforehand in order to ensure a clean slate mind. I didn't get it right the first time, I did spend quite a large amount of time benchmarking, measuring, prototyping, etc. Once I was satisfied I had finally had a solid code base, I went and benchmarked it…
As far as I can tell, HTTPSB is not available for Firefox, please fix! I would love to use something better than ABP (in terms of performance, it does content filtering just fine), but I'm not so desperate to abandon the (warning: subjective content ahead) greatest browser of all times to lower the memory footprint of an ad blocker.
Block known ad IPs and domains at the router or local level. This is what we did before adblock plus.
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. Maybe I just miss the 90s, but I would much rather have the simple content browser than a "full-fledged programming environment", especially since all of that content is c…
Your best bet is text-based browsers: Lynx, Elinks, or mayve Emacs/W3M. On simple sites like HN, they are more or less usable. I also sometimes wish the Web were just serving data in an easily processable format, and let the user decide what and how they are presented. Of course this would definitely and completely defeat the ads-supported scheme on which sits Internet. An ads-free Web would probably require the reso…
> I also sometimes wish the Web were just serving data in an easily processable format, and let the user decide what and how they are presented.
It's really sad that many people feel this is the state of the modern www. The original intention - you serve me stuff with suggestions about presentation, but my client software and OS and hardware can do what it likes with that stuff - appears to be long dead.
> Of course this would definitely and completely defeat the ads-supported scheme on which sits Internet. An ads-free Web would probably require the resources (media files, services, storage space, bandwidth, etc.) to be massively distributed among the PCs of the end-user, who are already paying for bandwidth, processing power and storage anyway. But it would also be quite inefficient as it would require equally massive fault tolerance.
I do not use ad blockers. I view ads. If I really like the site and trust their ad network I will click relevant links.
But I loathe the way some websites and apps work. Facebook on iOS opens all links in the facebook app. Apps and websites decide they will not let my zoom or rotate.
Especially hateful are the ads which take me out of a Chrome (iOS) session to open the app store. I contact owners of sites with those ads and politely tell them what happens, and then I cut and padte the URL to a list of sites that I will never ever visit again. This is as bad as the smiley ads that yell " HELLO!! ".
Advertisers seem reluctant to realise that irritating people like me ( ad tolerant) is a rwally bad move and is the reason so many peopke use ad blockers.
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#145It's not just memory overhead, it is also CPU overhead. One approach is to write the filtering engine from scratch. It is what I did, without looking at ABP's code beforehand in order to ensure a clean slate mind. I didn't get it right the first time, I did spend quite a large amount of time benchmarking, measuring, prototyping, etc. Once I was satisfied I had finally had a solid code base, I went and benchmarked it…
I wanted to try your plugin, but by default I can't load:
gmail, aws cloud services panel, and another cloud provider's configuration panel.
Maybe I don't know how to use it, but what are you trying to accomplish by preventing me from loading mail.google.com by default?!
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox can use all my RAM if I get great page load times and my other applications don't suffer. if anything I wish more programs would take full advantage of it. If every single application behaved like it owned all the memory on your machine, you would have a pretty horrible experience as they'll be basically fighting over what's available and likely hitting the swapfile. On the contrary, I do wish developers woul…
I have 16 gigs of RAM. I'd love to see every program use as much RAM usefully as possible. I don't want programs to write temp files to the drive. I want things to be done in RAM as much as possible to avoid wearing out the SSD. In fact, every application DOES behave like it owns all of the RAM on the machine. This is what virtual address space does, it's pretending that each program has access to any place in the me…
I have 1 gig of RAM. I'd love to see every program not waste tens or hundreds of megabytes not doing anything useful with it. I don't want programs to cause heavy swapping and slowdowns, I don't want them to crash because they ran out of memory. I want things to be done reasonably efficiently to allow me to do more with the amazing computing power I did not have fifteen years ago, with a better UX.
Sadly, a lot of current software does behave like it owns all of the RAM on the machine. But modern browsers are particularly bad, and it doesn't help that you need the web for so many things today. With browsers I'm not given much choice.
> This is what virtual address space does, it's pretending that each program has access to any place in the memory.
No, not at all. It's just handing control over to the operating system so paging can be handled transparently and programs can't overwrite each others' memory. Programs still have to acknowledge and respect the fact that memory is a finite resource, and they can't have all of it. That's how it has always been, a virtual address space doesn't change the fact.
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. Maybe I just miss the 90s, but I would much rather have the simple content browser than a "full-fledged programming environment", especially since all of that content is c…
NetSurf does a pretty good job. It does well at HTML and CSS on most sites and has only very basic JS support. Another is Dillo, although it doesn't have as good of CSS last I tried (version 3 isn't horrible though).
[deleted]
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#148It's not just memory overhead, it is also CPU overhead. One approach is to write the filtering engine from scratch. It is what I did, without looking at ABP's code beforehand in order to ensure a clean slate mind. I didn't get it right the first time, I did spend quite a large amount of time benchmarking, measuring, prototyping, etc. Once I was satisfied I had finally had a solid code base, I went and benchmarked it…
I wanted to try your plugin, but by default I can't load: gmail, aws cloud services panel, and another cloud provider's configuration panel. Maybe I don't know how to use it, but what are you trying to accomplish by preventing me from loading mail.google.com by default?!
If you read here:
https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/How-to-use-H...
There's a way to set it up to allow by default.
The plugin looks really interesting, but I wish it would give more detail about the requests that were blocked/allowed and a better explanation if I blacklist something, is that permanent or do I have to save it each time?
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I tried switching to Privoxy the other day. You have to manually convert AdBlock lists to their configuration format, so it's less convenient. On top of that, some sites no longer worked and browsing generally felt slower. I think in the end doing the filtering in a native (C) program is the way to go, but right now it's not comparable to how hassle-free ABP is.
Yeah, the config is horrible IMO. A packaged privoxy install with ABP-comparable rules would be very useful. I've never tried converting ABP rules into privoxy, but I did write a crude perl script to grab Ghostery's blocks and convert them into privoxy config files.
I found these while configuring Privoxy a few weeks ago:
GNU/Linux: http://andrwe.org/scripting/bash/privoxy-blocklist
OS X: https://github.com/skroll/privoxy-adblock
Scripts to convert Adblock-filters to the Privoxy-format. They have worked well so far.
Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can select a "scope" (top-left cell in the popup) which will tells where the rules apply. You can set it to automatically create a temporary domain-level scope when landing on a web page (in Settings tab), and if you select this, I suggest you also select "Auto-delete temporary scopes". Now any rules will apply only to that scope. For web sites you use regularly, just lock down these rules for that scope, and the…
Thanks. But this is exactly what I meant by micromanagement. Plus I'm afraid that strict settings will break sites I haven't visited before without me knowing they're somehow broken. Is there a way to configure the extension to just block ads?
Ok, I just created a setup file which you can restore from the About page which focus can be said to be "ad blocking":
https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/blob/master/stuff...
I selected the following preset lists:
- hosts-file.net/ad-servers
- someonewhocares.org/hosts/hosts
- easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easylist.txt
Note though that this will work best with the upcoming v 0.9.2.0 which supports almost all net request-based ABP filters (my benchmark on github was updated yesterday for that version).
In the above setup, HTTPSB has been set to work in allow-all/block-exceptionally mode, so nothing is blocked except for what appear in the above files.
Keep in mind that HTTPSB doesn't do element hiding (I see this as a separate extension.)