12 ms·

Since this submission relates to blocking ads and trackers, I think it's worth bringing up that uBlock Origin [0] is better than Adblock Plus in (all?) ways (se

Since this submission relates to blocking ads and trackers, I think it's worth bringing up that uBlock Origin [0] is better than Adblock Plus in (all?) ways (see the README for more details). I migrated to it a few years ago and overall I've been very happy with the outcome. I'm opposed to all tracking that isn't opt-in by default. I haven't thought about the topic at great lengths, so there may be cases which I'm failing to consider, but I've generally found "opt-out by default" to be highly hostile to users. e.g. In the US you're only allowed to digitally opt-out of credit card prescreening [1] for five years unless you're willing to mail something out. This considerably raises the burden on the user, even though I'd conjecture most people are not interested in receiving this kind of mail, and they'd largely consider it spam. I make a point of blacklisting any service that mails me spam, and I encourage others to do the same. Additionally, I'm also opposed to ads because I've found they're generally against the user's best interests. Humans are more important than companies. [0] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock [1] https://www.optoutprescreen.com/ https://www.optoutprescreen.com/

ryuuchin 10y ago
The only reason for still using ABP is because you haven't heard of uBlock.
- ClassyJacket 10y ago
  Or because you use Safari.
  - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
    Could you explain why you use Safari, other than it was pre-installed with your OS>
    - nicolas_t 10y ago
      Safari is actually really good when it comes to battery life. If I use Chrome (or Firefox to a lesser extent), my macbook's battery empties 30% faster. So, when my computer is not plugged in I tend to use Safari. That said, there's now ublock origin for Safari which is what I use.
    - username223 10y ago
      As others mentioned on another thread here recently: * lower power/memory use and greater battery life vs. Chrome or Mozilla * being written by a hardware company vs. a surveillance company
      - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
        Yes, lower power/memory usage equals better battery life at the cost of performance, Safari is not nearly as perfomant as Chrome or Firefox, and to be honest if you're developing the browser is not your main energy drain. Naive to put trust in either companies use of your details
        fastball 10y ago
        What? The browser is 100% my main energy drain when I'm developing. Sublime Text barely takes up any of my power or memory. Additionally, I don't use a single website where I noticed a performance hit when I switched from Chrome to Safari.
        staticassertion 10y ago
        > Yes, lower power/memory usage equals better battery life at the cost of performance, This is almost never actually the case. In reality, better performance tends to mean better battery due to improved usage of resources.
        ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
        This is kind of a ridiculous statement. Not a single category other than energy consumption does Safari benchmark near Chrome, Firefox or even Edge http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/best-browser-internet-explorer-vs-chrome-vs-firefox-vs-safari-vs-edge/3/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/best-browser-internet... Any of you are free to offer actual data proving otherwise
        nicolas_t 10y ago
        Anecdotical I know but on mac, when using velocityjs to change the css transform value (translate, scale and rotate) of 100+ spans, Safari is faster and the animation is smoother than Chrome. I've tested that on an imac, a macbook pro and a mac pro. Also, they don't mention in the benchmark you've linked if they're benchmarking the windows version or the mac version of Chrome. The windows version is faster in quite a few cases in my experience. Finally, while Chrome definitely has a better html5 compliance, there's one thing I hate about Chrome. It doesn't keep the state of the previous page when using the back button unlike Firefox, Safari and IE. See this: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=2879 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=2879
    - millstone 10y ago
      Best support for using multiple windows instead of tabs Reader button Scrolling performance Most Mac-like UI Privacy focus Memory use and battery life
  - detaro 10y ago
    there is this fork: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari (found via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13112280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13112280)
  - lstamour 10y ago
    Try native Content Blocking in Safari via Nope or 1Blocker rather than ABP etc.
- cm2187 10y ago
  What's the best solution for iOS?
  - rnhmjoj 10y ago
    I use Refine: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/refine-customizable-ad-blocker/id1011678834 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/refine-customizable-ad-block...
  - swinglock 10y ago
    I don't know if it's the best but Adguard is both free and excellent.
  - colejohnson66 10y ago
    For your home wifi network, look at Pi-Hole[0], a DNS based ad blocker [0]: https://pi-hole.net https://pi-hole.net
    - feld 10y ago
      I'd rather use OpenDNS to block the malware domains than use DNS based ad blocker
  - bigbugbag 10y ago
    Canning it and never look back ? or use focus[1] instead of safari, it's what's recommended on the "block ads" website[2]. [1]: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/focus-by-firefox-content-blocking/id1055677337 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/focus-by-firefox-content-blo... [2]: https://blockads.fivefilters.org/ https://blockads.fivefilters.org/
  - nyolfen 10y ago
    i use adblock[0], which while generically named, works phenomenally well. it's a pay app, which is a turnoff for some people, but well worth two dollars to me and is under active development. it uses a local vpn with host based filtering to adblock domains on all apps. the same developer also has a safari plugin adblocker, ADmosphere[1], which is free. alternately, or concurrently, if you prefer safari plugin adblockers, mozilla has one called focus[2], which they've recently expanded into an ephemeral browser that you can easily clear all local data on to avoid tracking. it's handy for one-off searches you don't necessarily want added to tracking network profiles of yourself. [0] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adblock/id691121579?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adblock/id691121579?mt=8 [1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/admosphere-free-ad-blocker/id1060126069?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/admosphere-free-ad-blocker/i... [2] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-focus-privacy-browser/id1055677337?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-focus-privacy-browse...
- tscs37 10y ago
  Or maybe because some people prefer it? I've heard of uBlock and I continue to use ABP, so I guess your theory falls flat. :)
  - Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
    ryuuchin wasn't suggesting people like you don't exist, just that such people are not reasonable. Theory holds.
    - tscs37 10y ago
      I feel myself being very reasonable. If you disagree, would you mind explaining why or is that unreasonable to ask? Theory does not hold.
      - kuschku 10y ago
        1. uBlock can be configured to show acceptable ads (it’s just opt-in). 2. uBlock is faster than ABP. So you have zero disadvantages, but one advantage. As a result, it’s strictly superior.
        tscs37 10y ago
        Point 1 is basically what your personal preference is. I prefer it opt out as this will lead to more people supporting websites with ads. (defaults matter, check out organ donor studies on this) While I admit that ublock is faster, Adblock plus has much better integration and looks better. When it's installed it presents me with very few options and I'm basically good to go without changing and settings. Additionally I use umatrix which covers and options abp does not,which helps abps speed to almost not matter anymore. Lastly I would add that the latencies I've measured to be caused by Adblock plus fall almost into the region of "doesn't matter". What little benefit ublock has given me the Times I've tested it was barely worth it. Purely by "it's faster" you should probably be using ed over any other editor right now since ed is objectively faster than any other POSIX editor. Or pretty much most editors. >strictly I'd refrain from using absolutes when making statements about personal opinion. It makes you look like a fool. >no advantages As stated earlier, abp has much better integration. It's one advantage vs one advantage. Seems like personal choice to me.
- contravariant 10y ago
  Maybe, but only because the people for whom uBlock is too complicated haven't heard of uBlock. Although for those people I usually recommend Adguard, not Adblock plus.
Jdam 10y ago
I tried to ditch ABP in favour of uBlock 1-or-so years ago and I found it way worse in terms of the amount of blocked ads.
- Throwaway23412 10y ago
  I'm struggling to see how that would even be true. ABP literally allows companies to pay to get past their block.
  - franciscop 10y ago
    90% of the whitelist is not paid, and that 10% helps develop the program. Not only that, you are asked upon installation whether or not to allow for acceptable ads (which is ticked on by default, but still not such a controversial point as you make it sound).
    - dumb-saint 10y ago
      > and that 10% helps develop the program Develop in what sense? uBlock origin is at least 10% better than ABP just by not doing that. The _only_ thing people want from such a program is to block all ads and trackers. That's it. That's the feature list. You decide to compromise the single goal to fund further "development"? How does that make any sense?
      - franciscop 10y ago
        And yet it's not trivial. Those programs have to be created and evolved as the advertising networks evolve. Now they block youtube videos when before they didn't. They will probably get those new FB ads soon. "the _only_ thing" is not as trivial as you make it sound. The tech evolves on both sides, so AdBlock tech should evolve too.
        dumb-saint 10y ago
        And yet uBlock Origin pull it off without betraying its users. Go figure.
briandear 10y ago
I get your point, but opposed to ads? You lost me there. How do people find out about your product?
- majewsky 10y ago
  This is the age of social media. As a consumer, if at all, I have the problem of finding out about too many products per time.
ClassyJacket 10y ago
Unfortunately there is no Ublock Origin for Safari.
- graham-miln 10y ago
  A little good news, a Safari fork now exists: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari
- bigbugbag 10y ago
  There is wipr[1] though. [1]: http://www.giorgiocalderolla.com/wipr.html http://www.giorgiocalderolla.com/wipr.html
morgante 10y ago
> is better than Adblock Plus in (all?) ways (see the README for more details) That's only if people agree with your ideology. Instead of making blanket statements which are inherently subjective, just explain why you prefer Adblock Plus. Personally, I vastly prefer Adblock Plus. I have no ideological objection to advertising or tracking in general, I just don't want intrusive ads. ABP does an excellent job of filtering out intrusive ads while still allowing me to support the sites I like where advertising is minimal. I love the ad-supported web and strongly disagree with the notion that it's against users' interests. Getting free content and services in a competitive marketplace without switching costs is invaluable.
- PerryCox 10y ago
  Read the README. ABP sold out a while back and now shows ads on certain websites who pay money to ABP. uBlock Origin doesn't show ads on any website unless you specifically allow it.
  - lttlrck 10y ago
    This was also mentioned in the article. ABP still allows you to block those whitelisted ads.
    - dawnerd 10y ago
      Why use an extension that white lists ads by default when there's an open source alternative that you have full control over?
      - a3n 10y ago
        Because, as mentioned higher up, you might actually want to support ad-based sites. This is an easy way to do it with no effort. I use uBlock. But I approve of the existence and success of ABP and similar. People differ.
        Thrillington 10y ago
Blackthorn 10y ago
Personally I wish UBO would allow you to easily whitelist unobtrusive ads as part of their filters like ABP does.
- morgante 10y ago
  Then people like OP would complain about how ABP has sold out to the inherent evil of advertising and capitalism.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  Me too, but I also want that list off by default Opt-in > Opt-out
- bigbugbag 10y ago
  UBO is against "acceptable ads" but there may be a way (or you can code one) to include ABP acceptable ads list[1] in UBO. [1]: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.txt https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.tx...
chenshuiluke 10y ago
I'd really love it if unlock allowed me to sync whitelisted sites like adblock plus does
- dawnerd 10y ago
  Last I checked there is a beta sync option.
JBiserkov 10y ago
uBlock Origin for Microsoft Edge https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/ublock-origin/9nblggh444l4 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/ublock-origin/9nblgg...
andybak 10y ago
> I'm opposed to all tracking that isn't opt-in by default As another poster said 'defaults matter'. If you want a representative sample of usage then "opt-in" taints your data. I would argue that there is nothing wrong with correctly anonymised, aggregated, opt-in tracking. I want most websites to track my usage and I hope they use the data to make their site better. Any time I don't want to be tracked I can switch to incognito. However - there are many issues around data-sharing between 3rd parties and deanonymising techniques. It's also fairly hard to trust that companies stick to their word so I'm not entirely complacent.

ryuuchin 10y ago

The only reason for still using ABP is because you haven't heard of uBlock.

ClassyJacket 10y ago
Or because you use Safari.
- ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
  Could you explain why you use Safari, other than it was pre-installed with your OS>
  - nicolas_t 10y ago
    Safari is actually really good when it comes to battery life. If I use Chrome (or Firefox to a lesser extent), my macbook's battery empties 30% faster. So, when my computer is not plugged in I tend to use Safari. That said, there's now ublock origin for Safari which is what I use.
  - username223 10y ago
    As others mentioned on another thread here recently: * lower power/memory use and greater battery life vs. Chrome or Mozilla * being written by a hardware company vs. a surveillance company
    - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
      Yes, lower power/memory usage equals better battery life at the cost of performance, Safari is not nearly as perfomant as Chrome or Firefox, and to be honest if you're developing the browser is not your main energy drain. Naive to put trust in either companies use of your details
      - fastball 10y ago
        What? The browser is 100% my main energy drain when I'm developing. Sublime Text barely takes up any of my power or memory. Additionally, I don't use a single website where I noticed a performance hit when I switched from Chrome to Safari.
      - staticassertion 10y ago
        > Yes, lower power/memory usage equals better battery life at the cost of performance, This is almost never actually the case. In reality, better performance tends to mean better battery due to improved usage of resources.
        ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
        This is kind of a ridiculous statement. Not a single category other than energy consumption does Safari benchmark near Chrome, Firefox or even Edge http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/best-browser-internet-explorer-vs-chrome-vs-firefox-vs-safari-vs-edge/3/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/best-browser-internet... Any of you are free to offer actual data proving otherwise
        nicolas_t 10y ago
        Anecdotical I know but on mac, when using velocityjs to change the css transform value (translate, scale and rotate) of 100+ spans, Safari is faster and the animation is smoother than Chrome. I've tested that on an imac, a macbook pro and a mac pro. Also, they don't mention in the benchmark you've linked if they're benchmarking the windows version or the mac version of Chrome. The windows version is faster in quite a few cases in my experience. Finally, while Chrome definitely has a better html5 compliance, there's one thing I hate about Chrome. It doesn't keep the state of the previous page when using the back button unlike Firefox, Safari and IE. See this: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=2879 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=2879
  - millstone 10y ago
    Best support for using multiple windows instead of tabs Reader button Scrolling performance Most Mac-like UI Privacy focus Memory use and battery life
- detaro 10y ago
  there is this fork: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari (found via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13112280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13112280)
- lstamour 10y ago
  Try native Content Blocking in Safari via Nope or 1Blocker rather than ABP etc.
cm2187 10y ago
What's the best solution for iOS?
- rnhmjoj 10y ago
  I use Refine: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/refine-customizable-ad-blocker/id1011678834 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/refine-customizable-ad-block...
- swinglock 10y ago
  I don't know if it's the best but Adguard is both free and excellent.
- colejohnson66 10y ago
  For your home wifi network, look at Pi-Hole[0], a DNS based ad blocker [0]: https://pi-hole.net https://pi-hole.net
  - feld 10y ago
    I'd rather use OpenDNS to block the malware domains than use DNS based ad blocker
- bigbugbag 10y ago
  Canning it and never look back ? or use focus[1] instead of safari, it's what's recommended on the "block ads" website[2]. [1]: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/focus-by-firefox-content-blocking/id1055677337 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/focus-by-firefox-content-blo... [2]: https://blockads.fivefilters.org/ https://blockads.fivefilters.org/
- nyolfen 10y ago
  i use adblock[0], which while generically named, works phenomenally well. it's a pay app, which is a turnoff for some people, but well worth two dollars to me and is under active development. it uses a local vpn with host based filtering to adblock domains on all apps. the same developer also has a safari plugin adblocker, ADmosphere[1], which is free. alternately, or concurrently, if you prefer safari plugin adblockers, mozilla has one called focus[2], which they've recently expanded into an ephemeral browser that you can easily clear all local data on to avoid tracking. it's handy for one-off searches you don't necessarily want added to tracking network profiles of yourself. [0] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adblock/id691121579?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adblock/id691121579?mt=8 [1] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/admosphere-free-ad-blocker/id1060126069?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/admosphere-free-ad-blocker/i... [2] https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-focus-privacy-browser/id1055677337?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/firefox-focus-privacy-browse...
tscs37 10y ago
Or maybe because some people prefer it? I've heard of uBlock and I continue to use ABP, so I guess your theory falls flat. :)
- Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
  ryuuchin wasn't suggesting people like you don't exist, just that such people are not reasonable. Theory holds.
  - tscs37 10y ago
    I feel myself being very reasonable. If you disagree, would you mind explaining why or is that unreasonable to ask? Theory does not hold.
    - kuschku 10y ago
      1. uBlock can be configured to show acceptable ads (it’s just opt-in). 2. uBlock is faster than ABP. So you have zero disadvantages, but one advantage. As a result, it’s strictly superior.
      - tscs37 10y ago
        Point 1 is basically what your personal preference is. I prefer it opt out as this will lead to more people supporting websites with ads. (defaults matter, check out organ donor studies on this) While I admit that ublock is faster, Adblock plus has much better integration and looks better. When it's installed it presents me with very few options and I'm basically good to go without changing and settings. Additionally I use umatrix which covers and options abp does not,which helps abps speed to almost not matter anymore. Lastly I would add that the latencies I've measured to be caused by Adblock plus fall almost into the region of "doesn't matter". What little benefit ublock has given me the Times I've tested it was barely worth it. Purely by "it's faster" you should probably be using ed over any other editor right now since ed is objectively faster than any other POSIX editor. Or pretty much most editors. >strictly I'd refrain from using absolutes when making statements about personal opinion. It makes you look like a fool. >no advantages As stated earlier, abp has much better integration. It's one advantage vs one advantage. Seems like personal choice to me.
contravariant 10y ago
Maybe, but only because the people for whom uBlock is too complicated haven't heard of uBlock. Although for those people I usually recommend Adguard, not Adblock plus.

Jdam 10y ago

I tried to ditch ABP in favour of uBlock 1-or-so years ago and I found it way worse in terms of the amount of blocked ads.

Throwaway23412 10y ago
I'm struggling to see how that would even be true. ABP literally allows companies to pay to get past their block.
- franciscop 10y ago
  90% of the whitelist is not paid, and that 10% helps develop the program. Not only that, you are asked upon installation whether or not to allow for acceptable ads (which is ticked on by default, but still not such a controversial point as you make it sound).
  - dumb-saint 10y ago
    > and that 10% helps develop the program Develop in what sense? uBlock origin is at least 10% better than ABP just by not doing that. The _only_ thing people want from such a program is to block all ads and trackers. That's it. That's the feature list. You decide to compromise the single goal to fund further "development"? How does that make any sense?
    - franciscop 10y ago
      And yet it's not trivial. Those programs have to be created and evolved as the advertising networks evolve. Now they block youtube videos when before they didn't. They will probably get those new FB ads soon. "the _only_ thing" is not as trivial as you make it sound. The tech evolves on both sides, so AdBlock tech should evolve too.
      - dumb-saint 10y ago
        And yet uBlock Origin pull it off without betraying its users. Go figure.

briandear 10y ago

I get your point, but opposed to ads? You lost me there. How do people find out about your product?

majewsky 10y ago
This is the age of social media. As a consumer, if at all, I have the problem of finding out about too many products per time.

ClassyJacket 10y ago

Unfortunately there is no Ublock Origin for Safari.

graham-miln 10y ago
A little good news, a Safari fork now exists: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari
bigbugbag 10y ago
There is wipr[1] though. [1]: http://www.giorgiocalderolla.com/wipr.html http://www.giorgiocalderolla.com/wipr.html

morgante 10y ago

> is better than Adblock Plus in (all?) ways (see the README for more details) That's only if people agree with your ideology. Instead of making blanket statements which are inherently subjective, just explain why you prefer Adblock Plus. Personally, I vastly prefer Adblock Plus. I have no ideological objection to advertising or tracking in general, I just don't want intrusive ads. ABP does an excellent job of filtering out intrusive ads while still allowing me to support the sites I like where advertising is minimal. I love the ad-supported web and strongly disagree with the notion that it's against users' interests. Getting free content and services in a competitive marketplace without switching costs is invaluable.

PerryCox 10y ago
Read the README. ABP sold out a while back and now shows ads on certain websites who pay money to ABP. uBlock Origin doesn't show ads on any website unless you specifically allow it.
- lttlrck 10y ago
  This was also mentioned in the article. ABP still allows you to block those whitelisted ads.
  - dawnerd 10y ago
    Why use an extension that white lists ads by default when there's an open source alternative that you have full control over?
    - a3n 10y ago
      Because, as mentioned higher up, you might actually want to support ad-based sites. This is an easy way to do it with no effort. I use uBlock. But I approve of the existence and success of ABP and similar. People differ.
      - Thrillington 10y ago

Blackthorn 10y ago

Personally I wish UBO would allow you to easily whitelist unobtrusive ads as part of their filters like ABP does.

morgante 10y ago
Then people like OP would complain about how ABP has sold out to the inherent evil of advertising and capitalism.
CaptSpify 10y ago
Me too, but I also want that list off by default Opt-in > Opt-out
bigbugbag 10y ago
UBO is against "acceptable ads" but there may be a way (or you can code one) to include ABP acceptable ads list[1] in UBO. [1]: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.txt https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.tx...

chenshuiluke 10y ago

I'd really love it if unlock allowed me to sync whitelisted sites like adblock plus does

dawnerd 10y ago
Last I checked there is a beta sync option.

JBiserkov 10y ago

uBlock Origin for Microsoft Edge https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/ublock-origin/9nblggh444l4 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/ublock-origin/9nblgg...

andybak 10y ago

> I'm opposed to all tracking that isn't opt-in by default As another poster said 'defaults matter'. If you want a representative sample of usage then "opt-in" taints your data. I would argue that there is nothing wrong with correctly anonymised, aggregated, opt-in tracking. I want most websites to track my usage and I hope they use the data to make their site better. Any time I don't want to be tracked I can switch to incognito. However - there are many issues around data-sharing between 3rd parties and deanonymising techniques. It's also fairly hard to trust that companies stick to their word so I'm not entirely complacent.