27 ms·

Firefox Preview adds support for recommended extensions, including uBlock Origin

694 points by Aissen 7y ago

AnonC 7y ago
The tweet says that addon support has been merged in Firefox Preview, which I understand as the ability to install addons in general. Then it follows with a reply showing how uBlock Origin can be installed easily. The title of this post could be clearer, lest people (like me) get confused and think of it as uBlock Origin being merged into Firefox Preview.
- Aissen 7y ago
  After tests I found that only uBlock Origin could be installed for now, since it's the only "Recommended Addon". So the HN title is in fact, clearer than the tweet. Edit : I clarified by saying that uBlock Origin can now be installed.
  - floatingatoll 7y ago
    The HN title still misrepresents the plan described at the linked document: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-compatibility-firefox-preview https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-compatibility-firef... > We are currently building support for an initial selection of Recommended Extensions for Firefox Preview. These extensions are expected to be officially supported for Firefox Preview during the first half of 2020.
    - Aissen 7y ago
      I can no longer edit the title. I'd welcome a modification by the mods to make it more clear. The document is linked in the Twitter thread as well.
      - dang 7y ago
        I've taken a crack at it. Does it work now?
        airstrike 7y ago
        Sounds like you need a verb before "support". Maybe "Firefox Preview adds support..."
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        dang 7y ago
        I didn't think there was room for that, but there is. Thanks!
        floatingatoll 7y ago
        It seems better now. Wouldn’t have thought to put it that way. Good call.
        Aissen 7y ago
        Thanks, having a title that is clear, accurate and concise is quite a challenge. Thanks a lot for the thankless task of moderating HN.
  - galangalalgol 7y ago
    Is it added? I can't get it to install. Is it only nightly?
m-p-3 7y ago
Which build has it? I'm using the Nightly from Google Play (#20350606) and I don't see any mention of add-ons.
- aibara 7y ago
  My build (just downloaded as a fresh install) is #20351804. Add-ons are a menu option now, with UBlock Origin as the only recommended one. Actually, it might be the only one available at the moment?
  - input_sh 7y ago
    Judging by the previous topics about Firefox Preview, uBlock is by far the most requested one. Worth pointing out that Firefox Preview is set to replace current Firefox within the next 5 months, add-on support will probably arrive a version or two after that.
    - iudqnolq 7y ago
      Is it definite that Preview will replace the current default before it gets full add-on support? That's surprising.
      - bscphil 7y ago
        Yes, it's definite. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-preview-upgrade-faqs#w_add-ons https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-preview-upgrade... "Full add-on support will be available in late 2020." "The Firefox for Android Beta and general release migrations will follow and the final migration will occur in Spring 2020." Mozilla were cagey about this for a while, but this doesn't come as a surprise to any of the many people who predicted they would do this.
- saghm 7y ago
  I'm not able to use it yet either, but a later tweet in the thread indicates it should be coming soon: "It's still very early, not even in a nightly yet, but should reach the next one"[1] [1]: https://twitter.com/Aissn/status/1224632613287100417 https://twitter.com/Aissn/status/1224632613287100417
joelthelion 7y ago
Firefox preview is really great. Performance is much, much better than the regular Firefox for Android. Now that it supports the most important extensions, there's really no reason not to switch.
- nicoburns 7y ago
  Indeed, this (ublock) is what I've been waiting for to switch. I'm definitely going to give it at least a proper go.
  - skrowl 7y ago
    I need Nano Adblock, Nano Defender, TamperMonkey, and BitWarden. Did they give a list of when / which addons?
    - icebraining 7y ago
      They say all "recommend extensions" should be working by the first half of 2020; I think these are it: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/search/?recommended=true&sort=random&type=extension https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/search/?recommended...
- dTal 7y ago
  Fenix (Firefox Preview) is not currently free software, as it contains proprietary Google libraries like com.google.android.gms and com.google.firebase. F-Droid currently maintain the Google-free fork of Firefox that is available on F-Droid, but they have said they lack the resources to do the same for Fenix as well. Until this is resolved, there is an excellent reason not to switch. https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/162#issuecomment-575199313 https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/162#issuecomm...
  - craftyguy 7y ago
    Agreed. For an organization that preaches "privacy", Mozilla still continues to make stupid decisions about including google crap everywhere.
iends 7y ago
Is this Android only or iOS too?
- muhammadusman 7y ago
  Looks like android only to me, please correct me if that's not the case.
- dblohm7 7y ago
  Android only; Apple policies do not allow non-WebKit engines to be distributed on iOS.
  - mataug 7y ago
    Oh interesting, I just learned that firefox for iOS is basically a wrapper around webkit inbuilt into iOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_for_iOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_for_iOS But does this mean that extensions will never work on iOS ?
    - Macha 7y ago
      Basically, yes.
- gnicholas 7y ago
  iOS doesn't allow an app store-within-an-app, which would presumably include this. Hopefully the antitrust agitating could lead to Apple rethinking this policy, because the lack of extensions/addons on iOS is really bad for accessibility (among other things).
mehdix 7y ago
Build artifacts for the curious: https://firefox-ci-tc.services.mozilla.com/api/queue/v1/task/b0F1rHGTSseQEfa2mamr-g/runs/0/artifacts/public/build/arm64-v8a/geckoNightly/target.apk https://firefox-ci-tc.services.mozilla.com/api/queue/v1/task...
abrowne 7y ago
Personally I'm looking forward to Stylus. Hard to enjoy the web without userstyles.
- yoavm 7y ago
  Definitely a hack, but I've been using uBlock Origin to do minor CSS tweaking on websites I use (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Static-filter-syntax#style https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Static-filter-syntax#...).
  - abrowne 7y ago
    Thanks for the tip. Should work for hiding fixed headers, my biggest "quality of life" improvement and maybe swapping fonts.
rahuldottech 7y ago
uBlock Origin is one of (if not the) best browser extensions. I want to support websites, I really do. And I don't mind non-intrusive ads either. But all the tracking and privacy invasion that comes along with that? No thank you.
- 0x0 7y ago
  Also, browser exploits. Blocking ads make sense as a decent antivirus strategy.
  - KarlKemp 7y ago
    I have never had any virus despite not running antivirus, occasional visits to the seedy underbelly of the web, and often having ad block disabled or not even installed. Nor do I remember anyone I know being infected without being tricked into installing something. When was the last time a browser vulnerability was actively exploited at any significant scale? So I can't shake the feeling this is really more of a post-hoc rationalisation for people not entirely comfortable to screw over creators in the rather selfish pursuit of personal comfort.
    - magicalhippo 7y ago
      A couple of years ago, a fairly well known Norwegian news outlet's ad network was hacked, and visitors were served malicious code. If the user had Java installed the code would use a 0-day exploit to _silently and without any user intervention_ install a trojan which would activate when the user later visited the online bank of by far the most common bank here in Norway. It would then redirect money by modifying the target bank account when the user paid bills or whatnot. The web page looked entirely as it should, it would just modify the request before it got sent. Now, the user had to have Java installed you might say, so not a big deal. Well, big deal, because the same bank, the most popular one, _required_ Java for signing in to their online bank. Fortunately the breach was noticed fairly quickly and the harm was limited. But after that I decided no more ads.
      - 7y ago
jraph 7y ago
Remember this discussion 7 month ago on the release of Firefox 68 [1], in which many people were worried about Fenix not getting support for extensions? Enjoy the happy ending :-) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20392546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20392546
lalaland1125 7y ago
Question for HN: What will happen to the web when uBlock Origin becomes prevelent enough? Currently the vast majority of the internet is completely (or mostly) ad funded: Twitter, Facebook, newspapers, Reddit, YouTube, etc etc. Adblockers like uBlock Origin hurt these sites by deriving them of revenue. Currently, there hasn't been too much of an effect because the adblock usage rate is low enough that adblocking free riders don't cause enough harm. However, this calculus changes quite a bit when adblock penetration reaches high enough levels. Once 80-90% of users use adblock I don't see how these sites will survive. And that adblock penetration rate increases year over year due to efforts like this. The real question is what will happen next. Will the government move to rule adblocking illegal? Will websites engage in sophisticated technical anti-adblock measures? Will companies like Google and Twitter give up on advertising and shutter their existing businesses? All I can say is that the current situation doesn't seem sustainable.
- cptskippy 7y ago
  There are already plenty of sites trying other revenue models without tracking. The Register prompts to allow an alternative form of advertising that's audience appropriate, Ars has a subscription model, and sites like Vox are partnering with Scroll.
- jraph 7y ago
  I can't wait for the big actors to leave room for a more decentralized network where power is dilluted across many smaller actors with saner business strategies / founding schemes. Please keep blocking ads, we don't need this pervasive power-hungry privacy-unfriendly manipulation. We need it to vanish. Emails can already be provided by small companies, ISPs and non profits, and would actually work even better without the big actors... because we would have to make it work, no choice! No more outlook.com deciding that your mail will end up in your recipients' spam folder because they think you are too small for them to give a shit about you... everybody would be small. I want chat, video calls and thought sharing with social circles to work the same way. We don't need one Facebook to rule all the social concerns of the whole human species (the part that uses internet anyway) as it sees fit. I would not worry too much for such services. It will work. Same for YouTube. I run a PeerTube instance on a cheap VPS for a small association. Granted, we don't have a lot of traffic, but if we had, the peer to peer feature would help, right? :-) As for newspapers... I don't have a definitive answer that would be privacy-friendly, sadly. Nor for search engines (including for videos in a more decentralized world....).
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
collsni 7y ago
App Store: Firefox preview nightly access for developers
surround 7y ago
Firefox needs to take its recommended extensions program more seriously. They have been recommending a copy-cat extension for over two years now, despite the reports of users and major developers (including gorhill himself). https://mobile.twitter.com/Pythux/status/1154403982342852609 https://mobile.twitter.com/Pythux/status/1154403982342852609
- GuB-42 7y ago
  Is that extension malicious or illegal? It looks like it is just a repackaged a AdGuard in a way that complies with the GPLv3 license of the original project. Sure, morally, it is questionable at best. But it looks like it is legal, does exactly what it says, and doesn't harm users in any way. Furthermore, it is highly rated with a lot of downloads. While I admit I'd rather not be supporting a ripoff, I don't think it is Mozilla's job to check the morals of developers unless there is a direct risk for users.
  - neurobro 7y ago
    It's not Mozilla's job to adjudicate license infringement, but the GPL doesn't give permission to lie about who owns the copyright as that extension apparently does. Regardless, Mozilla probably should hold "recommended" extensions to a higher standard if deceptive copycats are able to make the list.
  - floatingatoll 7y ago
    The Addons policy apparently has this to say about forks: > If the add-on is a fork of another add-on, the name must clearly distinguish it from the original and provide a significant difference in functionality and/or code. If anyone considers the addon to be in violation of this policy, they can use the “report for abuse” link halfway down the AMO page. Be sure to cite the policy paragraph and to politely explain why it violates the policy. The AMO review team may or may not agree, but at the very least they’ll consider it.
  - surround 7y ago
    Mozilla shouldn’t recommend an old and unmaintained fork (Adblocker ultimate) when they could recommend the actual, up-to-date extension (AdGuard). The rip-off extension only has a lot of downloads (more than the real extension, in fact) because it’s recommended by Mozilla. It’s not illegal, just unethical.
amanzi 7y ago
I've been using Firefox Preview as my daily driver for a couple months now. I have the strict privacy settings all turned on and find that it does a pretty good job of blocking ads to the point that I haven't really missed uBlock origin. I even get the occasional 'please disable your adblocker' message even without any additional extensions.
ryuukk_ 7y ago
keep pumping these pro-mozilla posts, this shady company will soon cease to exist, SEC coming at them ;)
fyrabanks 7y ago
Oh, shit, I am the only person browsing news.yc who doesn't know about uBlock Origin, and I am so fscking excited!! I've installed this and have no idea how to use it so I'm about to dip into uBlock Matrix instead wish me luck~
- kohtatsu 7y ago
  uMatrix is a lot of fun imo. Huge pain, but it's fun.
  - yborg 7y ago
    I use uMatrix to demonstrate what is happening on the Web to non-technical people. The redlining is an excellent visual cue. People are shocked at the dozens and dozens of tracking and analytics beacons that are loaded on any major site.
- Nition 7y ago
  You can install uBlock Origin and not do any configuration and it works well out of the box really.
- smichel17 7y ago
  I like using both uBlock Origin and uMatrix. uBlock I run with near-zero configuration tweaks, only enabling a few additional lists. uMatrix I run in a much more restrictive mode (block all 3rd party, along with first party scripts and XHRs). Then I selectively unblock to unbreak sites. In this way, uMatrix is my primary line of defense, and uBlock is a backup, in case I accidentally unblock an ad/malware domain when trying to unbreak a site. It also allows me to temporarily allow all with uMatrix if I just want a site to work, without enabling ads, etc.
  - OJFord 7y ago
    > uMatrix I run in a much more restrictive mode (block all 3rd party, along with first party scripts and XHRs). Then I selectively unblock to unbreak sites. That's exactly what I do too. You get better at knowing the likely candidates for what you need to unblock, but payment on a new site (or a modified since you last used it site) can be annoying. Incidentally it has also led to me being both undercharged (client-side upping of the price wrt quantity) and double charged ('failed' transaction, unblock something, try again, turned out they actually both went through).
Digit-Al 7y ago
Does anyone else have big problems with Firefox preview? It used to work absolutely fine for me then a couple of months ago it just started crashing every time I tried to open a website. This includes sites and pages that had previously loaded with no problem at all. It has become pretty much unusable for me. And this is on two different devices by completely different manufacturers :-(
- nachtigall 7y ago
  It crashes sometimes (about twice a week for me), but it's Preview Nightly what I use. I would suggest you uninstall and reinstall (from Google Play). Maybe it helps.
- amjd 7y ago
  Have you tried raising a bug on their issue tracker? I had the opposite experience. It was a bit unstable about 3-4 months ago where some websites would make it crash but I haven't faced any crashes in the last few months and it looks close to being a finished product.
- jazoom 7y ago
  It crashes for me too. I can deal with that. I find it much more annoying when it loses my tabs that I keep open to read later. After the last update the "undo" notification at the bottom sometimes doesn't disappear, which is annoyingly placed over the address bar and menu button. There's also no way to manually dismiss the "undo" notification. Despite all this it has by far the nicest user experience of an Android browser so I stick with it in the hopes one day it won't be super buggy. I'm sure that day will come.
wodenokoto 7y ago
What is Firefox preview? Desktop nightlies? One of the alternative mobile browsers Mozilla is working on?
- buster 7y ago
  It's a mobile version of firefox
- commoner 7y ago
  Mozilla is rewriting Firefox for Android from scratch. The new version is released as Firefox Preview until it is feature-complete enough to replace Firefox for Android. https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/06/27/reinventing-firefox-for-android-a-preview/ https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/06/27/reinventi... https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix uBlock Origin is currently available in the nightly channel of Firefox Preview: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.fenix.nightly https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.fe...
  - BadOakOx 7y ago
    The new version is released as Firefox Preview until it is feature-complete enough to replace Firefox for Android. And that will be pretty soon: https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2020/01/17/a-brand-new-browsing-experience-arrives-in-firefox-for-android-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2020/01/17/a-brand-n...
echelon 7y ago
> (Disclosure: I work for Google on ads, speaking only for myself.) I'm sure you're a fantastic person, but I seriously hate what you do. Your company has royally fucked up the web, and I hope for the day your job function is rendered obsolete. Ad tech is like privacy and brain rape [1]. Nobody asked for it. It's not okay. I'm sorry I'm being so bombastic, but I haven't run into someone working directly for the money minting department at the company I hate the most, and I really need to vent and seek answers. Why do you work for them? Do you have an ad blocker on your personal machine? Do your parents? Do you think about the negative externalities of being paid to fool people into parting with their money? Do you believe in the products that you let advertise on your platform? How do you justify it? [1] This analogy does disservice to actual victims of assault, but holy fuck do ads not deserve one iota of attention. Have you seen the taxi cabs with fucking animated electronic ads on the side of them? This is what you do. Stop fingerprinting me and following me. You don't have my permission.
- thedevilslawyer 7y ago
  > Why do you work for them? Lots of money, or i-got-mine.
- jefftk 7y ago
  > Ad tech is like privacy and brain rape [1]. Nobody asked for it. Ads are what fund the open web. If you want to start a new site, you can put ads on it and start making money. You don't need to convince people to pay you (very hard to do when you're as big as the NYT, let alone when you're small and new), you just sign up to have part of the space on your page used to advertise things. If you are not ok with ads, use an ad blocker. As I wrote above, sites are offering a trade: you can see our content if you also view our ads. I think ad blockers are fine as a way of saying "I reject your offer", but then the site should be free to say "then I won't send my content". (Ad blockers today also try to fool the site and work around anti-adblock, which I think isn't fair to the sites.) > Why do you work for them? They pay me, it's interesting work, I don't think the work is harmful. > Do you have an ad blocker on your personal machine? No. Ads are sometimes annoying, but they don't bother me very much. > Do your parents? No, though of course that's not up to me and if my dad decided to install one I wouldn't give him a hard time. > Do you think about the negative externalities of being paid to fool people into parting with their money? I have thought about the effect of my job a bunch, but I don't think "fool people into parting with their money" is a major effect of advertising. I've written more about this: https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising https://www.jefftk.com/p/value-of-working-in-ads https://www.jefftk.com/p/value-of-working-in-ads > Do you believe in the products that you let advertise on your platform? There are an enormous number of products that advertise through the Google Publisher Tag. Some of them I would buy, some of them aren't right for me but are right for others, and others aren't a good choice for anyone. This is the same thing I'd say about a grocery store. > How do you justify it? I don't think I'm doing something harmful that needs "justifying". If I thought my job was harmful I would quit and do something else.
Markoff 7y ago
yet still no pull down to refresh as option despite users asking for it for years
mtgx 7y ago
Anyone else seeing huge memory leaks and a lot of hanging in latest Firefox?
black_puppydog 7y ago
Maybe the title should give a hint that this is the mobile edition of FF. It took a me a minute to realize that, and how big a deal it is.
- pcnix 7y ago
  Firefox for Android has had addon support for ages, this is addon support for the Firefox for Android redesign - Firefox Preview.
jhoechtl 7y ago
Firefox Previews still does not support to add tags to Bookmarks. Those of you unaware what FF bookmarks has to offer see https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/address-bar-autocomplete-firefox?redirectlocale=en-US&redirectslug=awesome-bar-find-your-bookmarks-history-and-tabs#w_changing-results-on-the-fly https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/address-bar-autocomplet... Otheewise FF preview is since 6 months my android go-to browser. I missed nothing during that time.

694 points by Aissen 7y ago

The tweet says that addon support has been merged in Firefox Preview, which I understand as the ability to install addons in general. Then it follows with a reply showing how uBlock Origin can be installed easily. The title of this post could be clearer, lest people (like me) get confused and think of it as uBlock Origin being merged into Firefox Preview.

Aissen 7y ago
After tests I found that only uBlock Origin could be installed for now, since it's the only "Recommended Addon". So the HN title is in fact, clearer than the tweet. Edit : I clarified by saying that uBlock Origin can now be installed.
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  The HN title still misrepresents the plan described at the linked document: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-compatibility-firefox-preview https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/add-compatibility-firef... > We are currently building support for an initial selection of Recommended Extensions for Firefox Preview. These extensions are expected to be officially supported for Firefox Preview during the first half of 2020.
  - Aissen 7y ago
    I can no longer edit the title. I'd welcome a modification by the mods to make it more clear. The document is linked in the Twitter thread as well.
    - dang 7y ago
      I've taken a crack at it. Does it work now?
      - airstrike 7y ago
        Sounds like you need a verb before "support". Maybe "Firefox Preview adds support..."
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        dang 7y ago
        I didn't think there was room for that, but there is. Thanks!
      - floatingatoll 7y ago
        It seems better now. Wouldn’t have thought to put it that way. Good call.
      - Aissen 7y ago
        Thanks, having a title that is clear, accurate and concise is quite a challenge. Thanks a lot for the thankless task of moderating HN.
- galangalalgol 7y ago
  Is it added? I can't get it to install. Is it only nightly?

m-p-3 7y ago

Which build has it? I'm using the Nightly from Google Play (#20350606) and I don't see any mention of add-ons.

aibara 7y ago
My build (just downloaded as a fresh install) is #20351804. Add-ons are a menu option now, with UBlock Origin as the only recommended one. Actually, it might be the only one available at the moment?
- input_sh 7y ago
  Judging by the previous topics about Firefox Preview, uBlock is by far the most requested one. Worth pointing out that Firefox Preview is set to replace current Firefox within the next 5 months, add-on support will probably arrive a version or two after that.
  - iudqnolq 7y ago
    Is it definite that Preview will replace the current default before it gets full add-on support? That's surprising.
    - bscphil 7y ago
      Yes, it's definite. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-preview-upgrade-faqs#w_add-ons https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-preview-upgrade... "Full add-on support will be available in late 2020." "The Firefox for Android Beta and general release migrations will follow and the final migration will occur in Spring 2020." Mozilla were cagey about this for a while, but this doesn't come as a surprise to any of the many people who predicted they would do this.
saghm 7y ago
I'm not able to use it yet either, but a later tweet in the thread indicates it should be coming soon: "It's still very early, not even in a nightly yet, but should reach the next one"[1] [1]: https://twitter.com/Aissn/status/1224632613287100417 https://twitter.com/Aissn/status/1224632613287100417

joelthelion 7y ago

Firefox preview is really great. Performance is much, much better than the regular Firefox for Android. Now that it supports the most important extensions, there's really no reason not to switch.

nicoburns 7y ago
Indeed, this (ublock) is what I've been waiting for to switch. I'm definitely going to give it at least a proper go.
- skrowl 7y ago
  I need Nano Adblock, Nano Defender, TamperMonkey, and BitWarden. Did they give a list of when / which addons?
  - icebraining 7y ago
    They say all "recommend extensions" should be working by the first half of 2020; I think these are it: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/search/?recommended=true&sort=random&type=extension https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/search/?recommended...
dTal 7y ago
Fenix (Firefox Preview) is not currently free software, as it contains proprietary Google libraries like com.google.android.gms and com.google.firebase. F-Droid currently maintain the Google-free fork of Firefox that is available on F-Droid, but they have said they lack the resources to do the same for Fenix as well. Until this is resolved, there is an excellent reason not to switch. https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/162#issuecomment-575199313 https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix/issues/162#issuecomm...
- craftyguy 7y ago
  Agreed. For an organization that preaches "privacy", Mozilla still continues to make stupid decisions about including google crap everywhere.

iends 7y ago

Is this Android only or iOS too?

muhammadusman 7y ago
Looks like android only to me, please correct me if that's not the case.
dblohm7 7y ago
Android only; Apple policies do not allow non-WebKit engines to be distributed on iOS.
- mataug 7y ago
  Oh interesting, I just learned that firefox for iOS is basically a wrapper around webkit inbuilt into iOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_for_iOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_for_iOS But does this mean that extensions will never work on iOS ?
  - Macha 7y ago
    Basically, yes.
gnicholas 7y ago
iOS doesn't allow an app store-within-an-app, which would presumably include this. Hopefully the antitrust agitating could lead to Apple rethinking this policy, because the lack of extensions/addons on iOS is really bad for accessibility (among other things).

mehdix 7y ago

Build artifacts for the curious: https://firefox-ci-tc.services.mozilla.com/api/queue/v1/task/b0F1rHGTSseQEfa2mamr-g/runs/0/artifacts/public/build/arm64-v8a/geckoNightly/target.apk https://firefox-ci-tc.services.mozilla.com/api/queue/v1/task...

abrowne 7y ago

Personally I'm looking forward to Stylus. Hard to enjoy the web without userstyles.

yoavm 7y ago
Definitely a hack, but I've been using uBlock Origin to do minor CSS tweaking on websites I use (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Static-filter-syntax#style https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Static-filter-syntax#...).
- abrowne 7y ago
  Thanks for the tip. Should work for hiding fixed headers, my biggest "quality of life" improvement and maybe swapping fonts.

rahuldottech 7y ago

uBlock Origin is one of (if not the) best browser extensions. I want to support websites, I really do. And I don't mind non-intrusive ads either. But all the tracking and privacy invasion that comes along with that? No thank you.

0x0 7y ago
Also, browser exploits. Blocking ads make sense as a decent antivirus strategy.
- KarlKemp 7y ago
  I have never had any virus despite not running antivirus, occasional visits to the seedy underbelly of the web, and often having ad block disabled or not even installed. Nor do I remember anyone I know being infected without being tricked into installing something. When was the last time a browser vulnerability was actively exploited at any significant scale? So I can't shake the feeling this is really more of a post-hoc rationalisation for people not entirely comfortable to screw over creators in the rather selfish pursuit of personal comfort.
  - magicalhippo 7y ago
    A couple of years ago, a fairly well known Norwegian news outlet's ad network was hacked, and visitors were served malicious code. If the user had Java installed the code would use a 0-day exploit to _silently and without any user intervention_ install a trojan which would activate when the user later visited the online bank of by far the most common bank here in Norway. It would then redirect money by modifying the target bank account when the user paid bills or whatnot. The web page looked entirely as it should, it would just modify the request before it got sent. Now, the user had to have Java installed you might say, so not a big deal. Well, big deal, because the same bank, the most popular one, _required_ Java for signing in to their online bank. Fortunately the breach was noticed fairly quickly and the harm was limited. But after that I decided no more ads.
    - 7y ago

jraph 7y ago

Remember this discussion 7 month ago on the release of Firefox 68 [1], in which many people were worried about Fenix not getting support for extensions? Enjoy the happy ending :-) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20392546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20392546

lalaland1125 7y ago

Question for HN: What will happen to the web when uBlock Origin becomes prevelent enough? Currently the vast majority of the internet is completely (or mostly) ad funded: Twitter, Facebook, newspapers, Reddit, YouTube, etc etc. Adblockers like uBlock Origin hurt these sites by deriving them of revenue. Currently, there hasn't been too much of an effect because the adblock usage rate is low enough that adblocking free riders don't cause enough harm. However, this calculus changes quite a bit when adblock penetration reaches high enough levels. Once 80-90% of users use adblock I don't see how these sites will survive. And that adblock penetration rate increases year over year due to efforts like this. The real question is what will happen next. Will the government move to rule adblocking illegal? Will websites engage in sophisticated technical anti-adblock measures? Will companies like Google and Twitter give up on advertising and shutter their existing businesses? All I can say is that the current situation doesn't seem sustainable.

cptskippy 7y ago
There are already plenty of sites trying other revenue models without tracking. The Register prompts to allow an alternative form of advertising that's audience appropriate, Ars has a subscription model, and sites like Vox are partnering with Scroll.
jraph 7y ago
I can't wait for the big actors to leave room for a more decentralized network where power is dilluted across many smaller actors with saner business strategies / founding schemes. Please keep blocking ads, we don't need this pervasive power-hungry privacy-unfriendly manipulation. We need it to vanish. Emails can already be provided by small companies, ISPs and non profits, and would actually work even better without the big actors... because we would have to make it work, no choice! No more outlook.com deciding that your mail will end up in your recipients' spam folder because they think you are too small for them to give a shit about you... everybody would be small. I want chat, video calls and thought sharing with social circles to work the same way. We don't need one Facebook to rule all the social concerns of the whole human species (the part that uses internet anyway) as it sees fit. I would not worry too much for such services. It will work. Same for YouTube. I run a PeerTube instance on a cheap VPS for a small association. Granted, we don't have a lot of traffic, but if we had, the peer to peer feature would help, right? :-) As for newspapers... I don't have a definitive answer that would be privacy-friendly, sadly. Nor for search engines (including for videos in a more decentralized world....).

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

collsni 7y ago

App Store: Firefox preview nightly access for developers

surround 7y ago

Firefox needs to take its recommended extensions program more seriously. They have been recommending a copy-cat extension for over two years now, despite the reports of users and major developers (including gorhill himself). https://mobile.twitter.com/Pythux/status/1154403982342852609 https://mobile.twitter.com/Pythux/status/1154403982342852609

GuB-42 7y ago
Is that extension malicious or illegal? It looks like it is just a repackaged a AdGuard in a way that complies with the GPLv3 license of the original project. Sure, morally, it is questionable at best. But it looks like it is legal, does exactly what it says, and doesn't harm users in any way. Furthermore, it is highly rated with a lot of downloads. While I admit I'd rather not be supporting a ripoff, I don't think it is Mozilla's job to check the morals of developers unless there is a direct risk for users.
- neurobro 7y ago
  It's not Mozilla's job to adjudicate license infringement, but the GPL doesn't give permission to lie about who owns the copyright as that extension apparently does. Regardless, Mozilla probably should hold "recommended" extensions to a higher standard if deceptive copycats are able to make the list.
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  The Addons policy apparently has this to say about forks: > If the add-on is a fork of another add-on, the name must clearly distinguish it from the original and provide a significant difference in functionality and/or code. If anyone considers the addon to be in violation of this policy, they can use the “report for abuse” link halfway down the AMO page. Be sure to cite the policy paragraph and to politely explain why it violates the policy. The AMO review team may or may not agree, but at the very least they’ll consider it.
- surround 7y ago
  Mozilla shouldn’t recommend an old and unmaintained fork (Adblocker ultimate) when they could recommend the actual, up-to-date extension (AdGuard). The rip-off extension only has a lot of downloads (more than the real extension, in fact) because it’s recommended by Mozilla. It’s not illegal, just unethical.

amanzi 7y ago

I've been using Firefox Preview as my daily driver for a couple months now. I have the strict privacy settings all turned on and find that it does a pretty good job of blocking ads to the point that I haven't really missed uBlock origin. I even get the occasional 'please disable your adblocker' message even without any additional extensions.

ryuukk_ 7y ago

keep pumping these pro-mozilla posts, this shady company will soon cease to exist, SEC coming at them ;)

fyrabanks 7y ago

Oh, shit, I am the only person browsing news.yc who doesn't know about uBlock Origin, and I am so fscking excited!! I've installed this and have no idea how to use it so I'm about to dip into uBlock Matrix instead wish me luck~

kohtatsu 7y ago
uMatrix is a lot of fun imo. Huge pain, but it's fun.
- yborg 7y ago
  I use uMatrix to demonstrate what is happening on the Web to non-technical people. The redlining is an excellent visual cue. People are shocked at the dozens and dozens of tracking and analytics beacons that are loaded on any major site.
Nition 7y ago
You can install uBlock Origin and not do any configuration and it works well out of the box really.
smichel17 7y ago
I like using both uBlock Origin and uMatrix. uBlock I run with near-zero configuration tweaks, only enabling a few additional lists. uMatrix I run in a much more restrictive mode (block all 3rd party, along with first party scripts and XHRs). Then I selectively unblock to unbreak sites. In this way, uMatrix is my primary line of defense, and uBlock is a backup, in case I accidentally unblock an ad/malware domain when trying to unbreak a site. It also allows me to temporarily allow all with uMatrix if I just want a site to work, without enabling ads, etc.
- OJFord 7y ago
  > uMatrix I run in a much more restrictive mode (block all 3rd party, along with first party scripts and XHRs). Then I selectively unblock to unbreak sites. That's exactly what I do too. You get better at knowing the likely candidates for what you need to unblock, but payment on a new site (or a modified since you last used it site) can be annoying. Incidentally it has also led to me being both undercharged (client-side upping of the price wrt quantity) and double charged ('failed' transaction, unblock something, try again, turned out they actually both went through).

Digit-Al 7y ago

Does anyone else have big problems with Firefox preview? It used to work absolutely fine for me then a couple of months ago it just started crashing every time I tried to open a website. This includes sites and pages that had previously loaded with no problem at all. It has become pretty much unusable for me. And this is on two different devices by completely different manufacturers :-(

nachtigall 7y ago
It crashes sometimes (about twice a week for me), but it's Preview Nightly what I use. I would suggest you uninstall and reinstall (from Google Play). Maybe it helps.
amjd 7y ago
Have you tried raising a bug on their issue tracker? I had the opposite experience. It was a bit unstable about 3-4 months ago where some websites would make it crash but I haven't faced any crashes in the last few months and it looks close to being a finished product.
jazoom 7y ago
It crashes for me too. I can deal with that. I find it much more annoying when it loses my tabs that I keep open to read later. After the last update the "undo" notification at the bottom sometimes doesn't disappear, which is annoyingly placed over the address bar and menu button. There's also no way to manually dismiss the "undo" notification. Despite all this it has by far the nicest user experience of an Android browser so I stick with it in the hopes one day it won't be super buggy. I'm sure that day will come.

wodenokoto 7y ago

What is Firefox preview? Desktop nightlies? One of the alternative mobile browsers Mozilla is working on?

buster 7y ago
It's a mobile version of firefox
commoner 7y ago
Mozilla is rewriting Firefox for Android from scratch. The new version is released as Firefox Preview until it is feature-complete enough to replace Firefox for Android. https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/06/27/reinventing-firefox-for-android-a-preview/ https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2019/06/27/reinventi... https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/fenix uBlock Origin is currently available in the nightly channel of Firefox Preview: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.fenix.nightly https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.fe...
- BadOakOx 7y ago
  The new version is released as Firefox Preview until it is feature-complete enough to replace Firefox for Android. And that will be pretty soon: https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2020/01/17/a-brand-new-browsing-experience-arrives-in-firefox-for-android-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2020/01/17/a-brand-n...

echelon 7y ago

> (Disclosure: I work for Google on ads, speaking only for myself.) I'm sure you're a fantastic person, but I seriously hate what you do. Your company has royally fucked up the web, and I hope for the day your job function is rendered obsolete. Ad tech is like privacy and brain rape [1]. Nobody asked for it. It's not okay. I'm sorry I'm being so bombastic, but I haven't run into someone working directly for the money minting department at the company I hate the most, and I really need to vent and seek answers. Why do you work for them? Do you have an ad blocker on your personal machine? Do your parents? Do you think about the negative externalities of being paid to fool people into parting with their money? Do you believe in the products that you let advertise on your platform? How do you justify it? [1] This analogy does disservice to actual victims of assault, but holy fuck do ads not deserve one iota of attention. Have you seen the taxi cabs with fucking animated electronic ads on the side of them? This is what you do. Stop fingerprinting me and following me. You don't have my permission.

thedevilslawyer 7y ago
> Why do you work for them? Lots of money, or i-got-mine.
jefftk 7y ago
> Ad tech is like privacy and brain rape [1]. Nobody asked for it. Ads are what fund the open web. If you want to start a new site, you can put ads on it and start making money. You don't need to convince people to pay you (very hard to do when you're as big as the NYT, let alone when you're small and new), you just sign up to have part of the space on your page used to advertise things. If you are not ok with ads, use an ad blocker. As I wrote above, sites are offering a trade: you can see our content if you also view our ads. I think ad blockers are fine as a way of saying "I reject your offer", but then the site should be free to say "then I won't send my content". (Ad blockers today also try to fool the site and work around anti-adblock, which I think isn't fair to the sites.) > Why do you work for them? They pay me, it's interesting work, I don't think the work is harmful. > Do you have an ad blocker on your personal machine? No. Ads are sometimes annoying, but they don't bother me very much. > Do your parents? No, though of course that's not up to me and if my dad decided to install one I wouldn't give him a hard time. > Do you think about the negative externalities of being paid to fool people into parting with their money? I have thought about the effect of my job a bunch, but I don't think "fool people into parting with their money" is a major effect of advertising. I've written more about this: https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising https://www.jefftk.com/p/effect-of-advertising https://www.jefftk.com/p/value-of-working-in-ads https://www.jefftk.com/p/value-of-working-in-ads > Do you believe in the products that you let advertise on your platform? There are an enormous number of products that advertise through the Google Publisher Tag. Some of them I would buy, some of them aren't right for me but are right for others, and others aren't a good choice for anyone. This is the same thing I'd say about a grocery store. > How do you justify it? I don't think I'm doing something harmful that needs "justifying". If I thought my job was harmful I would quit and do something else.

Markoff 7y ago

yet still no pull down to refresh as option despite users asking for it for years

mtgx 7y ago

Anyone else seeing huge memory leaks and a lot of hanging in latest Firefox?

black_puppydog 7y ago

Maybe the title should give a hint that this is the mobile edition of FF. It took a me a minute to realize that, and how big a deal it is.

pcnix 7y ago
Firefox for Android has had addon support for ages, this is addon support for the Firefox for Android redesign - Firefox Preview.

jhoechtl 7y ago

Firefox Previews still does not support to add tags to Bookmarks. Those of you unaware what FF bookmarks has to offer see https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/address-bar-autocomplete-firefox?redirectlocale=en-US&redirectslug=awesome-bar-find-your-bookmarks-history-and-tabs#w_changing-results-on-the-fly https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/address-bar-autocomplet... Otheewise FF preview is since 6 months my android go-to browser. I missed nothing during that time.