181–190 of 250 posts
Ok. Goodbye chrome. I will be switching to whatever privacy-focused browser allows me to keep not seeing ads. I do wonder how long it will be before we see browser browsers, software that takes a browser instance and sanitizes it. Maybe chrome will continue as a daemon allowed to run inside a sandbox within a browser's browser that actually displays content to a human.
Can anyone explain why there isn't a robust and thriving adblocking solution available at the router or OS level? Why are we all forced to grasp at the straws of the browser?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does Google have veto power over what goes into Chromium? I had always assumed the relationship between Chromium and Google was akin to the relationship between Webkit and Apple, or between any ASF-donated project and its corporate originator: a community-owned (and several-major-corporate-stakeholders sponsored) open-source project upstream, with a corporate closed-source "living patchset" project sitting downstream…
As far as Microsoft is concerned, they're large enough to fork Chromium if they wanted to, just like how Google forked Webkit into Blink. Every other organization that ships a Chromium-based browser is fully at Google's mercy; Google holds the keys to the kingdom: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/
So, manifest v3 is out there, and does allow some form of adblocking. are there any adblockers actually implemented with it, so i can see for myself what the adblocking performance is like?
uBO Lite (uBOL) is a permission-less MV3-based content blocker.
Can anyone explain why there isn't a robust and thriving adblocking solution available at the router or OS level? Why are we all forced to grasp at the straws of the browser?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can someone give an example of what a good number would be? How many dynamic rules are currently used? uBlock's built in list has 47,000 EasyList has 75,000 EasyPrivacy has 31,000 Fanboy's List is 78,000 Basically none of the major lists fit inside this quantity.
Thanks. Has Google explained why the limit is so low? This doesn't seem like it would be super useful to an attacker, or meaningful for performance to change to, say, 150k. They've already raised it.
Checking 150K rules once wouldn't be a problem, but if you have to do that for 50 network requests on every single page load, that adds up. So the hope, as I understand it, is to set a ceiling to encourage developers to keep more up-to-date lists by pruning old and outdated rules. This prevents a situation where browser performance slowly degrades.
I'd like to see a system where users opt-in to allow ad blockers to collect metrics on which rules are actually applying, and have them occasionally trim anything under 0.01% usage. Which sounds like a small number, but should capture the majority of dead or unused rules. Of course, that would require a new browser API in a declarative system.
So, manifest v3 is out there, and does allow some form of adblocking. are there any adblockers actually implemented with it, so i can see for myself what the adblocking performance is like?
Ok. Goodbye chrome. I will be switching to whatever privacy-focused browser allows me to keep not seeing ads. I do wonder how long it will be before we see browser browsers, software that takes a browser instance and sanitizes it. Maybe chrome will continue as a daemon allowed to run inside a sandbox within a browser's browser that actually displays content to a human.
Welcome to Firefox. We have cookies!