Live data from Hacker News

Google proposes changes to Chromium which would disable uBlock Origin

bugs.chromium.org

651–660 of 779 posts

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

#651
post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do use Chrome. I know my data stays with Google and won't be siphoned to a third party that I don't know. I don't trust Google much but I trust them more than I trust a random third party, "better the devil you know than the devil you don't"

> I know my data stays with Google and won't be siphoned to a third party that I don't know. How can you be so sure about that?

You can't. But Google is an ad company and an ad company does not just give away their most valuable resource, the data. So it's more about the devil you know then the devil you don't know.

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

#652

Google is an advertisement publishing company. All the things they do, they do to earn money, not to give people anything. When Chrome first appeared, I was wondering about the extremely huge cost of building the browser and how Google wants to earn from that. Then it started to be obvious: it's all to spy on people. Not from the beginning, but slowly... the google account integration... the forced logging into the a…

Chrome doesn't log you in automatically, it just shows your Google account in Chrome if you've already logged in to your account. There's no sync happening.

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

#653
post #613

Google is an advertisement publishing company. All the things they do, they do to earn money, not to give people anything. When Chrome first appeared, I was wondering about the extremely huge cost of building the browser and how Google wants to earn from that. Then it started to be obvious: it's all to spy on people. Not from the beginning, but slowly... the google account integration... the forced logging into the a…

Sadly people who dont care about their privacy will keep on using Chrome. Same with folks who are not so "advanced" as we call it.

I care about my privacy and I'm still using Chrome. On a Chromebook and a Pixel device. Speak for yourself.

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

#654
post #622

Well, highly recommend Firefox. Works great after the updates last year and even use it on mobile. It bothers me that iOS doesn’t support addons to Firefox mobile. But on Android you can even install ublock origin

In Firefox I really miss the ability to tab-search from the address bar in site-specific search engines. I.e. in order to search for something on Amazon: type "amaz", tab, then type a search term. I didn't find any extensions for Firefox that would provide this feature.

I use ddg's bash syntax for it. !g for Google !a for Amazon etc.

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

#655
post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know my data stays with Google and won't be siphoned to a third party that I don't know. How can you be so sure about that?

I can't in the same way I can't be sure the Mozilla Corporation isn't pulling another Cliqz on me. So what's your point?

The point you made is (simplified) "Chrome is better than Firefox for privacy". Yet you brought nothing to support this beyond "the devil you know is better". Especially since Google is heavily relying on marketing your data to the point where they gather it covertly or force users into privacy breaking situations.

Common sense would lead anyone to assume they don't collect it just to flip bits on a storage device. Just when you thought you knew the devil. Knowing this guess you'll drop Chrome now, right?

[0]-[over 9000]

So tell me about this devil you know and how exactly knowing all that still pushes you to believe it's the better option?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18042802

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17942252

[3] https://mashable.com/article/google-chrome-69-forced-login/?...

[4] https://gizmodo.com/google-stores-location-data-even-with-lo...

[5] https://mashable.com/article/google-android-data-collection-...

[6] i can go on but I'm pretty sure a modicum of good will from your side would be enough to get the point.

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

#656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...and that's why I don't take part in the discussion about browsers. It's gotten political. You advertise shit to me, when I didn't ask you to. I tried Firefox for a month. I didn't like it. I went back to a Chromium fork. Now go away.

A person politely making some points in favour of Firefox in a discussion about browsers does not merit a rude response.

1. I never asked for any of that response, nor did the situation imply that I needed to learn about the points stated to make a better decision.

2. There's a general passive-combative conversation about browsers going on ("I like Firefox, I don't get why people like Chrome" and vice versa) that I never wanted to be a part of, mostly because of how disrespectful and counterproductive it is.

3. In a thread about ad-blocking, I got what is effectively an ad for Firefox.

I don't want any of this nonsense on my side of the table. "Use my product because I value it!" No, go away, I don't need this.

My choices are rarely uninformed. I spend time considering what to pick where I'm able to. I'd like my choices to be respected as such – not have my face plastered with someone else's unprompted opinion.

Here's an example of a better conversation:

– I liked this part of Firefox, and I wish it was in Chrome too.

– Do you not like Firefox whole, then? If so, why?

– Because of X, Y, and Z. I used it intensely for a month or so, so I got a good look at the way it behaves. I know X is solvable, but not Y or Z (I tried), and they're critical to my browsing experience.

– Okay, I see. I hope you consider (browser diversity, or whatever issues using Firefox's supposed to solve), because they're important.

– Oh yeah? Can you tell me why?

...and so on. A respectful conversation that sparks curiosity and provides context, without annoying any of the parties in the process.

Otherwise, you get what you give. Seems a fair approach to me.

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

#657
post #627
post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly people who dont care about their privacy will keep on using Chrome. Same with folks who are not so "advanced" as we call it.

I care about my privacy, that's why I don't use Firefox, because the Mozilla Corporation was caught red-handed sending user data to an advertisement company, Cliqz.

I guess you don’t use Chrome either then? Because it also sends user data to an advertising company…

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

#658

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…

>Sure it's more restrictive and yes will likely break existing adblockers, but it's probably a better model for the future.

A good example why "secure system" is, in a longer run, a system with low usability, and little control by the user/owner.

Right now we have ability to block URLs according to any rules, without being limited to whatever the browser author conceived. Perhaps we want to block some URLs based on context, or on content of previous communication, or whatever. Or perhaps pseudo-randomly, to emulate certain problems with the network.

Switching to "more secure" approach limits us to "one true way", and precludes any smart hack we may come up in the future.

It doesn't help that the change feels like attempt to squeeze out grassroots adblockers, and force people to, at best, use the ABP, which allows ad publishers to buy their way around blocks, and onto users' screens.

If uBlock becomes ineffective, I fully expect ABP to be even more aggressive with monetizing access to users' screens.

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

#659
post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is still the best performing browser (even if it's a resource hog). I tried using Firefox for Linux for about 6 months last year, but had to give up. I got frustrated with the random UI pauses/latency, random crashes, and broken web rendering (not its fault). On the other hand, Chrome just works, and provides a very smooth, low latency experience on Linux. I don't like that I have to give up my privacy for a d…

To be fair that seems anecdotal. I've been on Firefox since v57 on Arch Linux with no major issues.

Yeah, it's totally anecdotal and just my experience. I would really like to use Firefox. I may try it again. Quantum made such a big improvement on Linux which is why I gave it a shot and stuck with it so long. But it still had issues for me.

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

#660
post #303
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laying all the trans at one cripples my core i8 system for some time. Firefox's lazy tab loading is a much better user experience. Together with TreeStyle Tabs and the recent multi-container add-on, Firefox is just a better experience.

I used to be a fanatic about tree style tabs, but due to the new api, it's unusable with containers. I recently switched over to vertical tabs for that reason. I miss the tree layout, but at least now my tabs maintain their ordering.

What are you talking about? I've been using TreeStyleTabs with containers for a good year or so.
Post reply on HN