3 ms·
> something more forward thinking like AdNauseum I personally disagree with "forward thinking" description for what AdNauseam does, hence why I disagreed when
by gorhill 8y ago
> something more forward thinking like AdNauseum
I personally disagree with "forward thinking" description for what AdNauseam does, hence why I disagreed when the AdNauseam authors asked me to implement hooks in uBO[1].
To me the ideal for many reasons[2] is to reduce as much as possible the number of connections to 3rd parties on any given web page.
* * *
[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/67 https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/67
[2] Privacy exposure, page load time, bandwidth, CPU/memory.
- BRAlNlAC 8y agoI care about privacy in absolute terms. The difference to me, personally, between the advertisements I'm served after using AdNauseum and TMN running in a tab for 6 months vs the ads I was seeing using other blocking protocol (such as UBO and Privacy Badger) for longer periods of time have me convinced that the only way to gain any amount of privacy on the web these days is through obfuscation. I couldn't care less about page load time(as long as the hit is <500ms), bandwidth consumed or CPU/memory load on my desktop. I hate the tracky nature of the web nowadays, and feel that AdNauseam is fighting fire with fire. UBO is fighting fire with CO2, fine unless the fire has it's own oxygen supply, which I would argue the online ad industry has in the form of copious numbers of inattentive and uncaring users.