3 ms·
Used to be the first thing I install, but no more. There was a transition period where I would not install it but had a flashblock; my reasoning being that the
by Kylekramer 15y ago
Used to be the first thing I install, but no more. There was a transition period where I would not install it but had a flashblock; my reasoning being that the flashblocker took away most of the really annoying ones. My new policy is a clean install. So many advantages: I rather like experiencing sites as intended (as well as supporting sites) rather than trying to force my will onto sites. I used to run into so many edge cases where the adblocker/flashblocker would break my experience. And if sites truly offend me with their ads, it is no skin off my nose. I just don't visit anymore.
- fluidcruft 15y agoI used to use flashblock. Lately I've just uninstalled flash. There is very, very little value to flash from a productivity point of view.
- mst 15y agoAgreed on "experiencing as intended" and "supporting" - also, on tech news sites it's of interest to me to know what adverts such sites' advertisers believe their users want. Plus I've found an extensionless firefox is much less crashy than one with any number installed (and yes, I know chrome exists, but I prefer the way firefox interacts with the high contrast bright-colours-on-black type desktop colour schemes I prefer to use)
- piguy314 15y agoI run a locked down browser with lots of privacy and security extensions for my personal use then sandbox a unmodified chrome instance for viewing ads on unfiltered pages for work use.