4 ms·
The question still remains: what are they optimizing for if we already have sub-millisecond response times? The only evidence you offer is anecdotal. I'm havin
by feanaro 8y ago
The question still remains: what are they optimizing for if we already have sub-millisecond response times?
The only evidence you offer is anecdotal. I'm having a hard time imagining perceptible differences in sub-millisecond response times so either you or the study are in error.
And just to reiterate other comments: yes, Safari is probably able to block ads just fine now, because they modeled the engine according to capabilities needed right now. However, it comes at a huge cost to innovation and creates yet another barrier of entry guarded by a large corporation.
Taking all of that in account, it seems unnecessary. The looming threat of ulterior motives from Google remains ever-present.
- saagarjha 8y agoTo be honest, I'm much more in favor of this API because of its privacy features than performance. I think it's a little bit faster, but it has a much bigger benefit on the trust side because extensions no longer run arbitrary JavaScript in every page I visit.
- feanaro 8y agoIt's very improbable the few popular ad blocking extensions could slide in something sinister and avoid public scrutiny for a long time. You have much more reason to be worried about your privacy from Chrome than from uBlock Origin, since Chrome and Google provably violate it.
- saagarjha 8y agoI don’t use Chrome partially for this reason :)
- ubercow13 8y agoIt does not have any privacy benefit. Extensions can still do that
- saagarjha 8y agoThey can, but presumably they will be clearly labeled as they are today.