251–260 of 371 posts
Are we going to lose ublock origin on chrome when v2 will be disabled?
Haven't used adblocker extension for a while. I just have AdGuard Home on a VPS to be used with every device on the network and do DNS level blocking and all is clean including stopping trackers from non browser apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Switch to Brave, you will still maintain 99% of the bell and whistles of Chrome (because it's a Chrome fork) and you will have an Adblock engine directly in the browser core written in Rust. How cool is that... Especially on mobile Brave is a game changer. https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust
I despise anything that has touched cryptocurrency, which is why I don't like Brave.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it very clearly not killing adblocking given that... this adblocker just released a version using it.
Yet reduced in it's ability to perform it's intended function.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny how the only browsers that matter are the ones shipped by default by OS vendors... almost like the whole Windows/IE antitrust action was for show. Or I guess the OS vendors realized being an oligopoly is a good workaround for dated antitrust policy.
> antitrust action was for show. People often forget the US underwent an administrative change between the judgement and enforcement. Microsoft spent a lot of "think tank" money on influencing the new regimes enforcement mentality, not only on their own issue, but on monopolies in general. It was, from my recollection, definitely not for show.
Firefox seems pretty much on par with chrome these days and FF seems to win out on detection rates anyway so not sure why I'd want this combo? https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b... Does anyone has stats of adguard vs ublock by chance?
uBlock origin is far better, especially compared to this Manifest v3 version of AdGuard. AdGuard are just doing this to capture the upcoming hole in the market as uBlock Origin stops working in Chrome. Everyone should switch to Firefox.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my experience, almost every website doesn't feel as nice in Firefox as it does in Chrome. Ofcourse some of those sites are maintained by Google (YouTube).
And some things don't even work. For instance, my dentist had a sign "rate us here on google" with a QR code. That code didn't work on my phone. I eventually figured out that it works fine in Chrome , but doesn't work in Firefox. In fact, there's no way to rate businesses on Google.com from Firefox on my phone. The links just aren't there, and going directly gives a 404. Everything works fine on Chrome. That's obviou…
One of the stated goal of MV3 by Google[1] was to avoid extensions with broad permissions: > our new declarativeNetRequest API is designed to be a privacy-preserving method for extensions to block network requests without needing access to sensitive data This MV3-based AdGuard extension still requires a broad permission to "read or modify host data" on all sites[2]: "host_permissions": [ " " ], So what you have now i…
I hope filtering proxies like Proxomitron become popular again. They'll work on all browsers, and as long as locked-down corporate environments with their own needs for filtering content and the requirement to go through a proxy exist, it's not something they can easily kill off (despite trying their hardest to do so with all the "security" propaganda.) Stop being at the whims of the Google-controlled browser monopol…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It feels like this was always going to be how this played out. Google being the world's largest ad company has a vested interest in ensuring ads are still displayed to users and once a sizeable enough amount of the Chrome userbase started adblocking it directly threatened their revenue growth. The only option here it seems is to switch browsers.
But these changes don't ensure that ads are displayed to users. This won't impact Google's ad revenue at all. At most it will negatively impact their revenue because the less powerful API will let the sketchier advertisers try to bypass the filters.
Firefox still supports Manifest V2, which allows for more efficient and accurate blocking of advertising. (Among other things.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it's not actively developed anymore because of the large overlap in functionality with uBlock Origin as well as the maintainance burden. However it's not equivalent, because in uMatrix you have even more fine-grained control which content a certain domain in a certain context can load (i.e. scripts, images, css and xhr requests).
Its functionality is equivalent, its ease of use isn't (at least in my opinion) with uBlock origins UI you can block by content type and then whitelist the domains which are still allowed and that feels less granular then the uMatrix configuration dialog. But if you check the generated dynamic rules in the settings you'll see that it supports the same granular controls as uMatrix