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

Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

bugs.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 779 posts

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#531

Post by wvenable »

pointillistic wrote: post #269
aquova wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the UI don't you like? I've heard this complaint before, but the two appear pretty similar to me, at least to the point that I never considered one more appealing than the other.

icons, text, bookmarks bar, all seem unpolished, to the point it prevents me from using it.

I just opened both browsers and it's pretty hard to really see much of difference in UI. If anything, Chrome's UI is slightly more basic. But the icons, positions of menus, etc are almost identical.

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#532

Post by chmars »

joefkelley wrote: post #405
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Google is going to help me have more privacy by preventing me from letting extensions I want to run from having access to data I want that extension to have, so it can do a job I want it to do. Meanwhile, Google's software will of course have full access to everything I do online, and most of my data will live on Google servers. And the extension that I want to have access is also downloaded from Google servers. A…

When Google takes the approach you want, they are vilified for "letting third parties access your data" - as in the Gmail "scandal" a few months ago. If you let users do whatever they want, they will often shoot themselves in the foot. It's a tough balance.

Gmail users let third parties access their data, i.e., their e-mails. We should not blame Google if Gmail users can decide whether a third party can access their e-mails.

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#533

Post by Zarath »

darkpuma wrote: post #90
jenscow wrote: post #32

Not sure if they're purposefully blocking uBO. Those who are effected will either move to Firefox (and encourage their friends to), or just use another content-blocking technique (eg, DNS). For the few extra ad clicks they'll gain, it's just not worth the upset.

Their captcha is deliberately vindictive against users who don't have google accounts, use firefox and use uBO. For instance, the tile "fade in" lasting several seconds that plays absolutely no role in making the captcha difficult for ML to solve, existing only to punish real humans who don't comply with Google's surveillance system. So in light of that, I see no reason to not assume malice in this case too.

Oh my god that tile fade in irritates me to no end.

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#534

Post by dylan604 »

_ks3e wrote: post #442
dylan604 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and I don't like Firefox's UI/UX Maybe I'm not as critical about the UI, but I have both browsers open at the same time so I took a second to compare them. Both browsers have a row of tabs. Below that is a second row. The left most set of buttons is navigation (back, forward, refresh, etc), then the address bar, then on the very right of the row is a set of buttons for extensions, settings, etc. The remaining porti…

Firefox doesn't deal with touchscreen and touchpad gestures very well. Take, for instance, the two-finger pinch-zoom-in gesture. Chrom(ium), Opera, Edge, Safari etc. all smoothly and instantaneously magnify the area where the mouse is. Firefox, on the other hand, reflows the entire page with each zoom (as the other browsers do when you do a ctrl +/- zoom), which is inconsistent with how we're used to interacting with…

I do not own a touch screen device that is not a mobile device, so I have not experienced that. I also realize that my comments only related to the UI portion, not taking into account how responsiveness (or lack of) affects the UX portion.

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#536

Post by bad_user »

happybuy wrote: post #244

To defend Google a bit, it looks like the change is being put in place so that users would have more privacy – by stopping extensions accessing all active URLs. In essence they are copying what Apple did with Safari and their content blocking APIs. In this model, content blockers provide the browser with a set of blocking rules and the browser executes them against pages during render & load. Ad blocking can occur an…

The line about privacy is bullshit.

This change is clearly targeting aggressive ad-blockers that are too dangerous, too capable to circumvent via anti-adblocking technologies.

And Safari's content blocking is a piece of shit that's too limited and that's easily circumvented. It's in fact the weakest adblocking capability around and doesn't pose a threat to publishers.

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#537

Post by echelon »

metalliqaz wrote: post #4

Another reason to be glad that Firefox is still standing.

This is fantastic, actually. It flies in the face of end users, and there will be blow back.

Power users won't stand for this sort of thing and will switch to Firefox. Firefox, in turn, will gain greater development mindshare.

In aggregate, these privacy and "ads above all" stories will continue to taint the Google brand. Many of my layperson friends are starting to worry about their privacy when using Google products--it's a good thing!

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#538

Post by Kodix »

sridca wrote: post #475
dogecoinbase wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they do.

Do you have evidence? Or is it all just fear mongering?

Here is a recent article suggesting that that's at least somewhat true:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/4/18124718/google-search-re...

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#539

Post by visarga »

briandear wrote: post #432
seanp2k2 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DNS filtering has been on the "losing side" for a few decades now. As long as more than 0.1% of people don't use it, it's not worth solving for most ad companies. Even if places like YouTube DO find ways to stuff ads into my face (likely at great technical and operational expense to them), I make it a point to NEVER EVER buy anything advertised, search for any of it, etc. Because they know so little about me (I go ou…

Maybe if you won’t ever convert, they should simply stop wasting time serving you anything? YouTube isn’t a charity.

How could YouTube know you won't ever convert beforehand, and at scale? If they started blocking users for suspicion of not buying anything from ads they would have to block a sizeable portion of their traffic and that would have a negative impact on their company.

Re: Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

#540

Post by MarsAscendant »

bad_user wrote: post #522
MarsAscendant wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'd love is to have Firefox dev tools functionality in Chrome. Firefox highlights the edge lines of the selected element automatically, and in all directions (if I recall correctly). I have to use an extension – VisBug – to achieve that in Chrome. There's also the fonts window, which lets you in on what fonts are used on the page, and lets you modify the selected element's font settings – size, weight, slant/ita…

Why not just use Firefox?

My liking one thing about Firefox needn't entail my wanting to use the whole browser.
Post reply on HN