It was just sorted out. It'll be in the store within minutes apparently.
An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
61–70 of 119 posts
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#62I've switched over from ABP to UBlock Origin. UBO is so much faster than ABP, uses fewer resources, and does a better job. And, most importantly, they do not get in bed with the ad companies to arrange for acceptable ads. There are no acceptable ads in my view (no pun intended). I block ads precisely because they use my bandwidth, they are a vector for malware, they interfere with my viewing of websites, they track m…
Really cool suite of tools there! Have you tried https://redmorph.com (shameless plug) ? It might help add to your arsenal of internet privacy tools or help you use less. Please let me know of any feedback you might have on it.
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#63Update: "We apologize that the update was rejected due to an snag in the review system. The updated item will be available in the Chrome Web Store within 30 minutes."
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#64[deleted]
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Second time I see your comment, would you care sharing how you accomplish all this?
Sure. I use Firefox and install the following: - Disconnect - Ublock Origen (choose 3rd-Party block lists to suit.) - Privacy Badger (no set up, just install, it learns as you go) In Firefox, use about:config to change the following: - Toggle dom.storage.enabled to False - Toggle layout.css.visited_links_enabled to False - Toggle media.peerconnection.enabled to False - Toggle network.prefetch-next to False - Toggle n…
Pretty cool set up, but why no NoScript?
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#66And it's resolved: "Dear Developer,
We apologize that the update was rejected due to an snag in the review system. The updated item will be available in the Chrome Web Store within 30 minutes."
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Second time I see your comment, would you care sharing how you accomplish all this?
Sure. I use Firefox and install the following: - Disconnect - Ublock Origen (choose 3rd-Party block lists to suit.) - Privacy Badger (no set up, just install, it learns as you go) In Firefox, use about:config to change the following: - Toggle dom.storage.enabled to False - Toggle layout.css.visited_links_enabled to False - Toggle media.peerconnection.enabled to False - Toggle network.prefetch-next to False - Toggle n…
Thanks! I'll give this a shot. Maybe finally a reason for me to ditch Chrome and go the Firefox route.
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#68Update: "We apologize that the update was rejected due to an snag in the review system. The updated item will be available in the Chrome Web Store within 30 minutes."
Just got the extension update notification, seems like update 1.3.2 has been released. Nothing like a top HN post to grease the wheels.
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a magical world you live in where everything is free and no one needs to be paid for their work. Ads have been abused by companies over the years but whitelisting sites that whose content and services you value and don't abuse you with those ads are the only reason they can afford to exist. Edit: I get it, you don't want ads. People have abused them over the years and that's bad. My only point is that whitelisti…
about: Newsroom developer Ads from newspapers are one of the biggest vectors for malwared ads, because they have so many viewers. You're a very efficacious channel for the malicious. Because newspapers have proven incompetent at not endangering their readers. If you have an exciting new method of not malwaring your readers, that hasn't occurred to every newspaper that's malwared their readers so far, we'd love to see…
I worked for public media, the only ads we have are VERY basic PNGs served by DoubleClick or house membership ads for donations. Newsroom != newspaper and your assumption of how all news sites operate based on a few examples is incorrect.
Re: An update to UBlock Origin was rejected by the Chrome Web Store
#70I've switched over from ABP to UBlock Origin. UBO is so much faster than ABP, uses fewer resources, and does a better job. And, most importantly, they do not get in bed with the ad companies to arrange for acceptable ads. There are no acceptable ads in my view (no pun intended). I block ads precisely because they use my bandwidth, they are a vector for malware, they interfere with my viewing of websites, they track m…
ABP's resource usage is not that dramatic. It had a huge problem on Firefox due to an unsolved bug, but Mozilla solved it and now ABP runs without issues. I use ABP precisely because it has the notion of acceptable ads. > I have a right to a clutter-free Internet that is not tracking me This is where we disagree. No, you don't have such a right, not on other people's expense. What you do have is the right to not use…
[deleted]