Live data from Hacker News

Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

9to5google.com

391–400 of 400 posts

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#391

A lot of people have been very vocal about this. I use uBlock Origin Lite and haven't noticed a difference between it and uBlock Origin. Am I missing something?

> For uBlock Origin users on Chrome, there’s uBlock Origin Lite. However, the Lite version “allows some tracking, its blocklist is a fraction of what the original blocked, and it can't perform the dynamic filtering that made the original effective,” https://www.pcmag.com/news/googles-next-chrome-update-will-f...

[dead]

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#392
post #54

The Ladybird browser could potentially be a nice alternative in the future: https://ladybird.org/

that thing has been in development for the past 10 years. At this point, I doubt we ever see it.

10 years is far from the truth. SerenityOS was started 8 years ago and ladybird wasn't split from Serenity until 2024 and has an alpha scheduled for release this year.

It's been 2-4 years max.

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#393
post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ill be in the strong minority here, and it should be opt-in, but if theres no affiliate link, i would be ok with my tiny marketshare browser capturing the extra. less ethical for them to be replacing other peoples affiliate links, but they are also blocking ads ... so, not exactly the most purely ethical product in the world anyway.

I would much rather just pay the browser maker directly rather than it subtly doing strange things without letting me know. > so, not exactly the most purely ethical product in the world anyway. Ads are hardly an example of an ethical product to begin with, hah.

two wrongs?

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#394
post #300
post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things that I noticed: - Firefox did crash on me more frequently. It wasn't a daily, or even a weekly thing, but it was more of a problem. - Firefox limits how small I can shrink my tabs in the tab bar. Chrome also has a limit, but it is much less restrictive. That last one was the killer difference for me. Firefox wants me to be able to see (at least part of) the title of each tab, even if that means I can't see…

> - Firefox limits how small I can shrink my tabs in the tab bar. This can be changed via chrome/userChrome.css. Mine is: @namespace url("http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"); .tabbrowser-tab { min-width: 3em !important; clip-width: 3em !important; } [uidensity="compact"]:root { --tab-min-height: 30px !important; --newtab-margin: -3px 0 -3px -3px !important; } .tabbrowser-tab { max-height:…

I don't remember if that exactly is line-for-line what I did, but I was at least doing something similar, and not having success.

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#395
post #317
post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things that I noticed: - Firefox did crash on me more frequently. It wasn't a daily, or even a weekly thing, but it was more of a problem. - Firefox limits how small I can shrink my tabs in the tab bar. Chrome also has a limit, but it is much less restrictive. That last one was the killer difference for me. Firefox wants me to be able to see (at least part of) the title of each tab, even if that means I can't see…

Try vertical tabs. I fell in love since I've been using it daily. Zen has a special flavor of vertical tabs where pinned tabs open links in a modal, which I now can't do without, and can be reset to the original url with a middle click. I use that all the time for HN, mail, youtube, claude, etc. I believe Waterfox also has a neat implementation of vertical tabs as smart trees.

I really don't like the idea of vertical tabs, but given how so many web pages these days work, I should probably give them a try. That said, the tree-based approach is fascinating - points to Zen (and related efforts) for trying such a different paradigm for arranging tabs.

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A lot of sites serve their ads from the same domains as their actual content nowadays." What are some examples I observe the contrary among the sites submitted to HN Without access to other subdomains and other domains plus a Javascript interpreter, the ads and tracking don't work

Google's sponsored results, ads from streaming services. Usually when the website is not part of an ad network, but instead runs their own ads.

How many streaming services

Are these "sites" as in "websites"

Or something more akin to Netflix, endpoints accessed with an "app" on a "TV"

The parent comment's HOSTS file method will fall short, for sure

But a zone file that functions as an "allowlist", cf. "blocklist", can do the job in most cases

If the ads are in the video file then downloading makes more sense than streaming

Ads can be removed from the file, or skipped in the video player

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make the switch now! Gaming on Linux is really only getting better every year with much hard work from valve. Outside of developers opting out pretty much every single game works out of the box. I value my limited leisure time and to be able to just jump on my computer and start playing without any annoying nags about windows updates or restart this and strange unexplainable issues. Move all of your passwords and log…

There are still games you simply can't play on Linux, e.g. Valorant/LoL can't be played on Linux because of Riot Game's kernel-level anti-cheat. And as a highly addicted LoL player it's one of the only two reasons I still have Windows taking up 200GB of my precious hard drive space.

Stop playing Valorant/LoL until its available, its as simple as that really.

Vote with your wallet

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#398
post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a big fan of WaterFox! I switched when Firefox decided to add a ton of AI crap without providing a "turn this crap off" button (you could force it, but I don't want to fight my tools). Really good experience, been recommending it to all my friends. Librewolf is also good, and I use that on one of my other machines. I like Waterfox a bit more, but that's probably just personal taste. Both are solid and both cut th…

If you don't mind me asking, do Waterfox and Librewolf add significant benefits that you wouldn't get by customizing base Firefox?

IMHO the only forks that actually add something meaningful are Floorp and Zen. I personally stick with Firefox with some user.js tweaks. Projects like Celenity's Phoenix shows that most forks are not necessary and you need to trust another party.

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#399
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox on Android supports ublock, not sure why it wouldn't support it on iOS

It's because Apple does not allow Firefox to install an actual browser on iOS. Firefox on iOS is just a skinned version of WebKit/Safari. See 2.5.6: https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#per...

> Firefox on iOS is just a skinned version of WebKit/Safari

So are Chrome, Brave, and Edge. And yet, they support ad-blocking extensions (and so does Safari).

Re: Google Chrome update will close the door on ad blockers

#400
post #80

And I won't even notice. Firefox is probably the most divisive topic on this website. Mozilla gets ripped to shreds any time they're discussed, but they keep the open internet alive. I don't see how any self-respecting Hacker could choose anything else. I'm a big fan of critique, critiquing the scaffolding of our lives is the best thing we can do. That said...... we have nearly lost the browser wars and if we do it w…

white hat firefox, black hat brave?

Why brave black hat?
Post reply on HN