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

An update on uBlock

ublock.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: An update on uBlock

#51

Post by chucksmash »

18pfsmt wrote: post #26
michaelhoffman wrote: post #6

I'm using uBlock Origin and get uBlock Origin has prevented the following page from loading: https://www.ublock.org/announcement/ Because of the following filter ||ublock.org^$document Found in: uBlock filters – Badware risks

There seems to be lots of confusion around this topic. gorhill is the original author of uBlock, but when he handed the project off to someone else, he found that they didn't live up to ethical standards, which is why gorhill started uBlock Origin. That other person owns ublock.org, so it makes sense to filter that domain.

Thanks for the background. The relevant Wikipedia page doesn't provide detail beyond "a fork happened" and I was curious how the project creator ended up on the side of the fork with a different name and no access to the original domain.

Re: An update on uBlock

#52

Post by gruez »

wolrah wrote: post #46
gruez wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pi-hole is worse at adblocking than browser based adblockers (ublock origin, abp, etc.) because they can only block on domains. so it can't block ads such as somesite.example/ads/banner1.jpg or somecdn.example/adcompany/ads.js it also can't block inline ads such as those in google search results.

Exactly. DNS-based blocking is basically using an oversize hammer to drive nails. It works in some cases, but eventually you're going to run in to either false positives or false negatives depending on how it's configured. It's basically only actually useful for locked down platforms like certain fruit-flavored mobile devices that don't allow their users to install a proper ad blocker. If you use platforms that respe…

>It's basically only actually useful for locked down platforms like certain fruit-flavored mobile devices that don't allow their users to install a proper ad blocker

not even.

https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Ge...

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aitunes.apple.com+adbl...

Re: An update on uBlock

#53

Post by squarefoot »

I think this Soylent News article summarizes the situation pretty well.

https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=18/05/17/028245

tl;dr: the real one is Ublock Origin, get it here: https://github.com/gorhill/ublock

From the same author I would also suggest uMatrix, sort of a NoScript on steroids which allows a much finer filtering literally ripping pages of a great deal of their junk more selectively, but be aware that it requires "training" (telling it this can be loaded, that cannot) which for some non technical people could be annoying.

Re: An update on uBlock

#54

Post by daveFNbuck »

octosphere wrote: post #39
michaelhoffman wrote: post #6

I'm using uBlock Origin and get uBlock Origin has prevented the following page from loading: https://www.ublock.org/announcement/ Because of the following filter ||ublock.org^$document Found in: uBlock filters – Badware risks

I saw this too. I imagine the intention here is to drive away any interest in the non-good uBlock, i.e the uBlock that is not uBlock Origin.

I think it's more to protect people like me who use uBlock Origin and clicked the link thinking it was on the site that makes my blocker.

Re: An update on uBlock

#55

Post by dghughes »

trash_panda wrote: post #27
__s wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm anyone know how they compare? (reading github description, seems it includes this as a source, but also others)

A quick line count shows that the file from your link has 14354 entries, while the one on the github repo has 65357.

My brain read that as 65537.

Re: An update on uBlock

#56

Post by timbit42 »

hk__2 wrote: post #47

> If you’ve noticed recent updates to the product, that’s because uBlock has been acquired by the team responsible for AdBlock. We will be investing heavily into uBlock to help it deliver on the promise of being one of the best ad blockers available. Why would they invest "heavily into uBlock" instead of improving AdBlock? It doesn’t make sense to maintain two different ad blockers.

Because they are more interested in profits and more subscribers than blocking ads. Also, Adblock is more memory and CPU intensive, so perhaps they are looking to fix those issues in Adblock.

Re: An update on uBlock

#57

Post by mosselman »

hendersoon wrote: post #28
dghughes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, isn't that moot since UBlock (not origin) will probably now be called AdBlock?

I rather doubt that, as much of uBlock non-Origin's userbase is comprised of people who installed it by accident instead of uBlock Origin. Its only real value is in its name.

"as much of uBlock non-Origin's userbase is comprised of people who installed it by accident instead of uBlock Origin"

How do you know this? Is there a source?

Re: An update on uBlock

#58

Post by mosselman »

se7entime wrote: post #50

Found in: uBlock filters – Badware risks By uBlock Origin

I know what you mean because I have gotten te same screen, but if I hadn't I would have no idea what you mean by your comment. If it is your intention to be understood, try to add some context and full sentences.

Re: An update on uBlock

#59

Post by NextHendrix »

IntelMiner wrote: post #45
newscracker wrote: post #41

Anyone who wants a low overhead and trusted ad blocker should use uBlock Origin. The developer even refuses to take any donations (for some good reasons). For those who want a lot more control and a content blocker, uMatrix would help. Anything named as “Adblock” or “Adblock Plus” or similar is just a way for advertisers to decide what ads users see and don’t see, depending on how much they’re willing to pay and be h…

+1 to uBlock Origin Amusingly, trying to load the uBlock website was initially blocked by uBlock Origin!

Was also blocked for me which confused me until I noticed the different shape of the logo

Re: An update on uBlock

#60

Post by tmikaeld »

IntelMiner wrote: post #45
newscracker wrote: post #41

Anyone who wants a low overhead and trusted ad blocker should use uBlock Origin. The developer even refuses to take any donations (for some good reasons). For those who want a lot more control and a content blocker, uMatrix would help. Anything named as “Adblock” or “Adblock Plus” or similar is just a way for advertisers to decide what ads users see and don’t see, depending on how much they’re willing to pay and be h…

+1 to uBlock Origin Amusingly, trying to load the uBlock website was initially blocked by uBlock Origin!

Still blocked for me
Post reply on HN