4 ms·

The page almost looks perfect with JS disabled. If the major browsers were better at giving the user a way to use and maintain a whitelist of which web sites a

by gkya 9y ago

The page almost looks perfect with JS disabled. If the major browsers were better at giving the user a way to use and maintain a whitelist of which web sites are allowed to run JS, maybe the websites become less JS-heavy. NoScript or UBlock don't even come close wrt UX to what xombrero was, and what qutebrowser is ATM (I've switched to it from Firefox, just awesome).

vanderZwan 9y ago
I assume you've given uMatrix a shot?
- gkya 9y ago
  Nope. I was using uBlock origin on Firefox with dynamic blocking and quite a bit of the provided blacklists enabled. I just gave quick uMatrix a look, and it does not seem fundamentally different to me. I like that I can easily add some globs and use version control on the blocklist without having to import-export my settings. Qutebrowser is a very interesting browser. It's easily scriptable using a config file in python, but not only. It has a nice Emacs Customize like UI, and then it has a system reminiscent of CGI for running external scripts against web pages or on events. A definite improvement for me over whatever is available. I maintain a handful of websites with js enabled (HN, reddit, youtube, a couple more), and for the web apps I'm forced to use, I just start up Chromium temporarily. It's been lovely so far.
  - vanderZwan 9y ago
    uMatrix works quite differently than uBlock, and the interface is much easier IMO. It also lets you manually edit rules by text if the GUI doesn't work out. For example, the following lines blocks any third-party loading of anything from Facebook or Twitter, but allows Google Fonts and Gstatic to load except for cookies * facebook.com * block * fonts.googleapis.com * allow * fonts.googleapis.com cookie block * fonts.googleapis.com frame allow * gstatic.com cookie block * gstatic.com frame allow * gstatic.com media allow * gstatic.com other allow * gstatic.com script allow * gstatic.com xhr allow * twitter.com * block Cutebrowser is interesting, thanks for pointing that out to me! [0] https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki

by gkya 9y ago

vanderZwan 9y ago

I assume you've given uMatrix a shot?

gkya 9y ago
Nope. I was using uBlock origin on Firefox with dynamic blocking and quite a bit of the provided blacklists enabled. I just gave quick uMatrix a look, and it does not seem fundamentally different to me. I like that I can easily add some globs and use version control on the blocklist without having to import-export my settings. Qutebrowser is a very interesting browser. It's easily scriptable using a config file in python, but not only. It has a nice Emacs Customize like UI, and then it has a system reminiscent of CGI for running external scripts against web pages or on events. A definite improvement for me over whatever is available. I maintain a handful of websites with js enabled (HN, reddit, youtube, a couple more), and for the web apps I'm forced to use, I just start up Chromium temporarily. It's been lovely so far.
- vanderZwan 9y ago
  uMatrix works quite differently than uBlock, and the interface is much easier IMO. It also lets you manually edit rules by text if the GUI doesn't work out. For example, the following lines blocks any third-party loading of anything from Facebook or Twitter, but allows Google Fonts and Gstatic to load except for cookies * facebook.com * block * fonts.googleapis.com * allow * fonts.googleapis.com cookie block * fonts.googleapis.com frame allow * gstatic.com cookie block * gstatic.com frame allow * gstatic.com media allow * gstatic.com other allow * gstatic.com script allow * gstatic.com xhr allow * twitter.com * block Cutebrowser is interesting, thanks for pointing that out to me! [0] https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki