Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

uBlock Origin 1.20

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 338 posts

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#311

Post by peterhil »

djsumdog wrote: post #239
gbrown wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox mobile on Android with uBlock origin is currently a vastly superior experience to Chrome.

I've been using Firefox mobile for years and really love it. It's always been a vastly better experience than Chrome. I usually use DNS based adblockers on my phone though; AdAway+rooting via magisk.

Without rooting, you can use the VPN blocking provided by AdGuard. It has some paid features (like ad blocking in apps), which it sometimes reminds about, but otherwise I am happy to use both Chrome and Firefox for Android without advertisements.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#312

Post by ehsankia »

nickjj wrote: post #115
ehsankia wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are definitely a few OSS that don't get anymore as much love as they deserve. VLC and OBS are two example of programs that are so damn good, even paid alternatives hardly can compete.

OBS is interesting because not only is it one of the best programs available for what it does (and cross platform to boot, which is huge), but it's also a catalyst for making people an absurd amount of money. Pretty much every top streamer uses it. I wouldn't be surprised if OBS was responsible for generating over $75 million worth of earnings for just the top streamers on Twitch in the last few years, then there's T…

Honestly, streaming aside, before OBS there really wasn't any way to record your webcam except the shitty proprietary webcam application. Similarly, for screen recording, most people used Fraps or Taxi, both of which were very limited.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#313

Post by therealdrag0 »

chongli wrote: post #243
aluren wrote: post #54

I am dumbfounded that uBlock Origin, arguably the single most important extension in modern web browsing, and one that makes millions of lives easier by making their web experience bearable at all, all of this depends on one single person, working for free. Now there's also the list maintainers, who also work for free. Still makes you wonder about how the world works. There's probably many other similar instances. In…

Also keep in mind that the entire problem exists because it was created by thousands of people working in the advertising industry. It's frustrating how often people have to solve problems created by other people.

And thousands of people are working in the ad industry because so many people want internet content for free.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#314

Post by whamlastxmas »

292355744930110 wrote: post #231
whamlastxmas wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have used uMatrix for quite a while and honestly it's a huge pain in the ass. I wind up just opening a different browser for certain web pages

You can turn off uMatrix for a specific site.

For some reason it still blocks iframes even when off

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#315

Post by sirius87 »

chipperyman573 wrote: post #251
sirius87 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can second this. Along with "Popup Blocker (strict)" and "HTTPS Everywhere", the web is a lot less annoying. But Firefox on Android has some basic issues: the tabs go dead/unresponsive on some JS heavy websites.

Why do you need a strict popup blocker? I honestly can't remember the last time I got a popup ad, but there are useful popups every once in a while (oauth logins, etc). It seems more annoying than anything.

Some blogs have scripts that hijack clicks.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#316

Post by SpaceGorilla »

peterhil wrote: post #311
djsumdog wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using Firefox mobile for years and really love it. It's always been a vastly better experience than Chrome. I usually use DNS based adblockers on my phone though; AdAway+rooting via magisk.

Without rooting, you can use the VPN blocking provided by AdGuard. It has some paid features (like ad blocking in apps), which it sometimes reminds about, but otherwise I am happy to use both Chrome and Firefox for Android without advertisements.

Check out Blokada. It's a free open source app that does the same thing.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#317

Post by vanderZwan »

m-p-3 wrote: post #210
gbrown wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox mobile on Android with uBlock origin is currently a vastly superior experience to Chrome.

And the Redirect AMP to HTML [1] addon, I enjoy my AMP-free life. [1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/amp2html/

There are also a couple of link-cleaning add-ons that are really nice if you want to reshare links opened through, say, Facebook

(not on mobile, so not sure which one I'm using)

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#318

Post by cyborgx7 »

darepublic wrote: post #253
cyborgx7 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad blocking on android really is Firefox's killer app. I'm surprised it isn't more popular just because of this.

From a selfish POV isn't it better as an adblock user that other users don't use adblock? Then they unwittingly subsidize your pleasant ad free experience.

From a selfish point of view, I care more about the benefits to me brought by Firefox having a bigger market share and Mozilla having more influence on the development of the web, than the benefits brought to me by other people looking at ads.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#319

Post by sjwright »

Endy wrote: post #299
sjwright wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would strongly advise not using Pale Moon—for numerous reasons specific to that particular distribution (which aren't interesting enough to repeat here) but mostly for reasons that apply to all minor web browser projects; particularly ones based off old code: — How quickly will serious vulnerabilities be patched? Given the project is so small, I wouldn't trust their future response to be rapid even if they have bee…

I have found that, as much as Moonchild & Tobin can be difficult, I trust their judgment far more than I do Mozilla's. I want to be in control of my browser, I want to determine what gets downloaded and uploaded from my PC. They tend to be on that side. Also, my problems with the browser product itself are simple: the UI is awful and cannot be meaningfully fixed, and multi-process programs cause my computer to hang (…

Each to their own.

I would never trust the judgement of the most important piece of software on my computer to a small group of tinkerers maintaining a fork of someone else's massively complicated and deeply outdated source code. I don't care who they are—if they don't have a big enough reputation on the line, there's no reason to trust them.

I'm sure your cousin is super trustworthy, but that doesn't mean anyone should put him in charge of the armoured vehicles division of a bank.

Besides, it's a lot easier for a microscopically small and individualistic outfit like Pale Moon to never disappoint you compared to a large, managed entity like Mozilla which has disclosure policies and hundreds of employees each with their own priorities and agenda.

Re: uBlock Origin 1.20

#320

Post by jversd673 »

michaelmrose wrote: post #297
jversd673 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Pale moon is not bad product at all, as for the horrendous individuals, well that's wrong too. >For the technical reasons read https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=135424#p135424 >For the interpersonal reasons please see the lead developer acting like a spoiled child here. (btw mattatobin is not a lead developer, get your fact straight please) https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=134236#p134236 >Frien…

A set of instructions that would allow the end user to build something cannot be subject to any copyright license insofar as it doesn't actually contain the software that is bound by said license. The unofficial patches are presumably by definition not copyright the project considering they are written by a third party. This is kind of how multiple source based packages work. Nothing is being distributed by the repo…

> I've noticed that you didn't bother to address the technical reasons whatsoever.

It's right there, bellow the "crappy, out of date, insecure, janky browser" unfounded claims, open the two links I've provided and you'll see that ALL the technical reasons are covered extensively.

Post reply on HN