4 ms·

Way too negative. I have been using uBlock Origin for years and it's one of those things that just works. Turning it off in those rare moments it needs to be o

Way too negative. I have been using uBlock Origin for years and it's one of those things that just works. Turning it off in those rare moments it needs to be off is a bleak reminder of the state of the internet. Why would I want to go through the hassle of managing all of this work by myself? A massive THANK YOU to the individuals behind uBlock - You literally make the internet tolerable for me.

mobilemidget 9y ago
I don't know why you call it negative, I call it realistic. It's like putting all _caught_ pedofiles in a jail, and then saying children can roam the streets free and in safety...
- otp124 9y ago
  It might be realistic to whitelist egress on a production server, but certainly not at my mother’s house.
  - thinkMOAR 9y ago
    The safety of your mothers' e.g. online banking, privacy, computer data(pictures, home videos etc) is less important then the company you work for (and probably has insurance)? update: Apparently for many here, protecting your family is less important. Sort of happy you are not my son or daughter giving me computer advice.
    - QasimK 9y ago
      The point is that if you do what you suggest, either maintaining your mothers’ devices becomes practically a full-time job where you are on call at all times (and you end up fully monitoring what she is doing even if you don’t want to know), or, from her perspective, the internet is “broken”. Probably both.
      - thinkMOAR 9y ago
        The point is, that you make assumptions how much work it actually is and i am not, as i do this with almost everybody that asks me for such 'help' (after fixing, cleaning etc their machines). Stating it will be a full time job is such an overstatement, i'd almost call it a blatant lie. Your mom is on FB, YT, and maybe a handful of other sites daily (so no popups for those or decisions to take there). You could also monitor and log and then apply block/allow rules later for when you visit for coffee or dinner. (if you want to reply something here about unprotected in that period, think about all the new bad urls not on such url lists yet for apps like uBlock) And i only get positive feedback how well it works and how much they learned about websites and other internet services, the information leaked to 3rd parties, cooperation between companies. Even scared some contacts i have from social media like FB, Instagram and alike. Makes them a lot more aware of what is going on instead of giving them a list of known crap urls, again, maintained by some samaritan in an attic. Nice effort, i just think its fair from sufficient nowadays on the internet. In the time it takes these people to update the list, 1000 new crap urls have been registered. And doesn't take that much time, sure you have to put in some more time then, simply telling people to install uBlock (or similar) and tell them that they are safe and secure with this application. I prefer to educate properly instead of just throwing some half *ed solution their way and having them figure out it fails in the end anyway. Another note, the internet is broken, broken in many ways. And _you_ know this else you would not suggest any protection, apps like uBlock.
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
  > I don't know why you call it negative, I call it realistic. Negativity usually bills itself as realism, but that doesn't make it so.
- elorant 9y ago
  It might be realistic for you, or me or anyone in here, but it definitely isn't realistic for the average user. And it's them we try to protect by blocking ads. Technical savvy people have an armada of options at their disposal, for example we could just block JavaScript. But the average Joe relies heavily on ad blockers for a smoother and safer experience browsing the web. You can't expect non technical users to do any of the things you propose.
- ggg9990 9y ago
  You're arguing against yourself. They do put all caught pedophiles in jail, and it's extremely safe for children to roam the streets from a pedophile point of view (but very risky from a car accident point of view).
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

mobilemidget 9y ago

I don't know why you call it negative, I call it realistic. It's like putting all _caught_ pedofiles in a jail, and then saying children can roam the streets free and in safety...

otp124 9y ago
It might be realistic to whitelist egress on a production server, but certainly not at my mother’s house.
- thinkMOAR 9y ago
  The safety of your mothers' e.g. online banking, privacy, computer data(pictures, home videos etc) is less important then the company you work for (and probably has insurance)? update: Apparently for many here, protecting your family is less important. Sort of happy you are not my son or daughter giving me computer advice.
  - QasimK 9y ago
    The point is that if you do what you suggest, either maintaining your mothers’ devices becomes practically a full-time job where you are on call at all times (and you end up fully monitoring what she is doing even if you don’t want to know), or, from her perspective, the internet is “broken”. Probably both.
    - thinkMOAR 9y ago
      The point is, that you make assumptions how much work it actually is and i am not, as i do this with almost everybody that asks me for such 'help' (after fixing, cleaning etc their machines). Stating it will be a full time job is such an overstatement, i'd almost call it a blatant lie. Your mom is on FB, YT, and maybe a handful of other sites daily (so no popups for those or decisions to take there). You could also monitor and log and then apply block/allow rules later for when you visit for coffee or dinner. (if you want to reply something here about unprotected in that period, think about all the new bad urls not on such url lists yet for apps like uBlock) And i only get positive feedback how well it works and how much they learned about websites and other internet services, the information leaked to 3rd parties, cooperation between companies. Even scared some contacts i have from social media like FB, Instagram and alike. Makes them a lot more aware of what is going on instead of giving them a list of known crap urls, again, maintained by some samaritan in an attic. Nice effort, i just think its fair from sufficient nowadays on the internet. In the time it takes these people to update the list, 1000 new crap urls have been registered. And doesn't take that much time, sure you have to put in some more time then, simply telling people to install uBlock (or similar) and tell them that they are safe and secure with this application. I prefer to educate properly instead of just throwing some half *ed solution their way and having them figure out it fails in the end anyway. Another note, the internet is broken, broken in many ways. And _you_ know this else you would not suggest any protection, apps like uBlock.
yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
> I don't know why you call it negative, I call it realistic. Negativity usually bills itself as realism, but that doesn't make it so.
elorant 9y ago
It might be realistic for you, or me or anyone in here, but it definitely isn't realistic for the average user. And it's them we try to protect by blocking ads. Technical savvy people have an armada of options at their disposal, for example we could just block JavaScript. But the average Joe relies heavily on ad blockers for a smoother and safer experience browsing the web. You can't expect non technical users to do any of the things you propose.
ggg9990 9y ago
You're arguing against yourself. They do put all caught pedophiles in jail, and it's extremely safe for children to roam the streets from a pedophile point of view (but very risky from a car accident point of view).
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]