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

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

0x44.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 962 posts

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#851

Post by paulryanrogers »

kldg wrote: post #607

Just for anyone here switching: Don't get firefox; get firefox developer edition. It's firefox but you don't need to pay Mozilla $20 and go through verification to local-load browser extensions you write for yourself. (you can do this on non-DE firefox but you have to reload extensions every time you restart browser) I've been off Chrome for a while after using it for about a decade. Firefox is nice to have around, b…

Does DE really persist local add-ons? Last time I tried, it still unloaded them on browser restarts.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#853

Post by healsdata »

godelski wrote: post #839
al_borland wrote: post #66

Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.

> ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). People should do this for many reasons. Monopolies are not good for anyone, including Google[0]. For most people, that means installing Firefox or using Safari. There are others, but the space is small. Don't listen to people, Firefox is perfectly good and most people wont see major differences. Truth is we like to complain. It's good to push things forward and find issues…

> Don't listen to people, Firefox is perfectly good and most people wont see major differences.

I'm sorry, but this just isn't true. I used Firefox exclusively for about a year and had a website not work about once a month. This included my state's unemployment portal and a small business store.

When it happens, there's no indication of why. It's only because I'm technical I thought too try it in Chrome. My non-technical family isn't going navigate that.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#854

Post by abustamam »

norskeld wrote: post #613
breve wrote: post #159

The best bypass is to use Firefox. uBlock Origin works best in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

Speaking of 'works best in Firefox'... I mainly use Chrome (kinda have to), and it's practically impossible to use it for reviewing big GitHub PRs with many files changed (UI just freezes), but everything's perfectly fine in Firefox!

Our CTO was giving a hybrid presentation in a conference room on zoom, and his M3 Mac kept complaining of high memory usage. Chrome was rated at taking 60GB of memory.

No single consumer application should be taking over 60gb of memory.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#855

Post by throw10920 »

al_borland wrote: post #66

Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.

> If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers).

I disagree, on two fronts.

First, I think that the underlying root cause is a level lower - it's the fact that so much content on the web is funded via privacy-invasive and malware-laden advertisements, rather than direct payment.

Second, there are multiple valid things that you can do - you don't just have to pick one.

You can work on Manifest V2 bypasses and you can boycott Chrom{e,ium} and you can contact your representatives to ask them to craft regulation against this and you can promote/use financial models where you pay for stuff with money instead of eyeballs. All are useful! (especially because regulation is incredibly difficult to get write and takes a long time to build political will, draft, pass, and implement)

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#856

Post by carlosjobim »

ndiddy wrote: post #222
tech234a wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually there are several adblockers available for Safari on iOS; the functionality was introduced in 2015. Adblock Plus and Adguard are some of the larger extensions available, and now uBlock Origin Lite is now being beta tested for Safari on iOS.

I find the "switch to Safari" talk amusing because the adblockers available for Safari are functionally equivalent to the MV3 API that everyone's complaining about. The problem with the "static list of content to block" approach that Safari and MV3 use is that you can't trick the site into thinking that ads have been loaded when they haven't, like MV2 allows via Javascript injection. The effect of this is that you'll…

I never see these popups in Safari, so I think theory and practice is not the same.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#857

Post by xboxnolifes »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #287
xboxnolifes wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox has multiple, user-affecting, memory leaks related to Youtube (unconfirmed if just youtube), going back at least 7 years. Tab scrollbar as no option to be disabled, so I had to write CSS to get tabs into a form close to what I would like similar to chrome. Tab mute icon has no (working) option to disable the click event, so I had to write CSS to remove it. I made some other changes, but I forget what. At leas…

"memory leaks related to Youtube" News to me. If this is even true, in the end it's still "so what?" Meaning, the alternative is even worse so, let's say granted there is this problem. Where is the better alternative that does not have this problem? Chrome doesn't have other equivalent or worse memory problems? Even if not leaking, it simply uses so much it's the same end result. I've never consciously noticed a prob…

Chrome has never crashed on me from Youtube memory leaks. Firefox has.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#858

Post by xboxnolifes »

XorNot wrote: post #267
xboxnolifes wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox has multiple, user-affecting, memory leaks related to Youtube (unconfirmed if just youtube), going back at least 7 years. Tab scrollbar as no option to be disabled, so I had to write CSS to get tabs into a form close to what I would like similar to chrome. Tab mute icon has no (working) option to disable the click event, so I had to write CSS to remove it. I made some other changes, but I forget what. At leas…

The average user does not notice any of these things. Except the YouTube thing but that's because I'm not even sure what you're talking about: I leave YouTube windows open in Firefox for weeks.

I'm pretty sure the memory leak applies the longer you navigate the same youtube tab. If I browse a lot in one day it gets to the point of crashing if I don't open a new tab/window.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#859

Post by dheera »

jacquesm wrote: post #589
dheera wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Linux. No site works for me. Facebook, Google, none of them work. Even the demo at https://demo.yubico.com/webauthn-technical/ does not work.

That's strange. I use a yubikey under Linux/FF and it works like a charm and has done so since I started using them years ago.

Well, mine doesn't work, so I'm still using Chrome. When they make it work, I'll switch to Firefox. There should really be a big fat "report bug" button on all these apps that captures logs and sends it with 1-click permission and a voice recording to explain what's wrong, like Tesla FSD's bug reporting system. I don't have bandwidth to deal with their community forums and all the crap it takes to register for them.

Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

#860

Post by const_cast »

Etheryte wrote: post #710
const_cast wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never used these, but if I had to guess: these probably don't have the same power as full Manifest V2 extensions. Also names like "Adblock Plus" scare me. I don't want someone I don't trust getting my web activity.

You don't have to guess, they're as capable as MV2 and AdGuard has been around for a long time.

A quick Google search reveals AdGuard is only a DNS resolver, so it has the adblocking power of something like a Pi Hole. So... nowhere near as capable. It can't inject JS into webpages to prevent pop ups, which is going to lead to white boxes everywhere. In addition, ads can obfuscate the URL or share domains with non-ad content - so that content won't be blocked with a DNS resolver.

However, the software seems safe. Their privacy policy says they only store websites locally, and never upload them to servers. The app is also open-source.

Ad Block Plus is not privacy respecting. They collect usage data as well as unique device identifiers.

Post reply on HN