6 ms·

It works better in Firefox anyway. Use Firefox and be happy: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorh

It works better in Firefox anyway. Use Firefox and be happy: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

codevark 2y ago
[dead]
neves 2y ago
Another alternative is to use Brave Browser
- ElectroNomad 2y ago
  Wdym? It’s also a chromium browser i.e. it’ll lose uBlock as well eventually
  - Scokee 2y ago
    Why do you think this would happen? Brave incorporates ublock as part of their Rust based adblocking library https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust
    - josephcsible 2y ago
      Because eventually there will be enough changes to the upstream Chromium codebase that the only way to keep these extensions working would be to stop following upstream, which would mean massively increased development costs.
      - porridgeraisin 2y ago
        But they don't do adblocking with ublock, so it'll be safe
      - joecot 2y ago
        Chrome is going to continue supporting v2 extensions for enterprise users, so presumably it'll be pretty trivial to keep support for everyone else.
        josephcsible 2y ago
        Google says that's only going to last one additional year, not forever.
    - gertop 2y ago
      They don't use ublock.
  - tapoxi 2y ago
    Brave has a native ad blocker built in, so it's unaffected by changes in the extension API.
  - yett 2y ago
    "For as long as we’re able (and assuming the cooperation of the extension authors), Brave will continue to support some privacy-relevant MV2 extensions—specifically AdGuard, NoScript, uBlock Origin, and uMatrix" https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/ https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/
    - gaws 2y ago
      Why take the word of the developers of a Chromium-based browser, some of whom may not even be part of the project in the long run? Firefox is built on an entirely different engine and doesn't have this problem.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- mrinfinitiesx 2y ago
  And catch another chromium 0day, good idea
- Larrikin 2y ago
  Using any Chromium browser supports Google's goal of controlling all web standards
- webspinner 2y ago
  I do this, and run Ubo on top of it. Mostly for social media tracking purposes.
attentive 2y ago
same, but it does have a warning: "This extension may soon no longer be supported because it doesn't follow best practices for Chrome extensions."
- ac130kz 2y ago
  No, it does not. Firefox still fully supports those manifest v2 handles.
  - attentive 2y ago
    My response was to a comment that it's still available on chrome store. I no longer see that comment. Assuming it was deleted, does HN change parent comments if parent was deleted? - that's misleading. I didn't comment on firefox at all.
    - BenjiWiebe 2y ago
      Afaik deleted comments do not affect the hierarchy - comments are still shown as children of a comment that is marked as deleted and has no content. It sure looks like you replied to the wrong comment by accident.
    - DavideNL 2y ago
      > "My response was to a comment that it's still available on chrome store. I no longer see that comment. > Assuming it was deleted, does HN change parent comments if parent was deleted? - that's misleading." That's not possible as far as i know; What is possible, is that the original commenter EDITED their comment to a different text, soon after they posted it.
  - Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago
    People keep saying that and it's true. Also every extension on firefox that I installed said "I need permission to do whatever i want with your browser", which made me really uncomfortable
KingOfCoders 2y ago
Firefox has a vested interest (money) now for people to watch (their network) ads. Expect to move Firefox to drop uBlock too (written in Firefox with uBlock)
- alphan0n 2y ago
  Is this supposed to be an argument for Chrome? They had their chance and blew it. If Mozilla proves unviable we’ll move from Firefox to the next entity that isn’t hostile to their user base or make one that isn’t.
  - soganess 2y ago
    You say that like web rendering engines grow on trees... At this point your (multi-platform) options are: - Chrome + its kin - Firefox + its kin There is one/two new "third" browsers/engines in the works that will be ready "who knows when". The shift you'd make is from Firefox to something based on Firefox / Chrome... then you wait and hope that Ladybird actually gets somewhere or that the Servo engine doesn't take another forever to mature... and someone builds a browser around it. I'd call that mighty slim pickings. Especially considering how beholden the downstream browsers are to the upstream ones, particularly for smaller projects.
  - KingOfCoders 2y ago
    No it's an argument against the comment "It works better in Firefox anyway"
- knowitnone 2y ago
  If and when that happens, then I will move off Firefox
  - KingOfCoders 2y ago
    Where to? Sadly I'm on Windows and there are no more options that I can see. So it will be dual boot again in the future I guess + Ladybird.
thrdbndndn 2y ago
I absolutely agree with that from a technical perspective, but in typical usage, the users won't notice any difference. To be honest, I think uBo almost become a cult (which is nothing wrong, to be clear). It has lots of very opinionated development progress happened/happening to it, and most of them are irrelevant for majority of users (even the "power" users). And if I dare to say, it's at the cost of its UX. For example, a few years ago, uBo disabled the ability to "greenlight" a domain (i.e. adding a whitelist dynamic rule) by simply clicking in the (advanced) popup. The official reason is that it's the most misused features, which is true, but it makes legitimate use of it (to whitelist a 3rd-party domain for a specific site because otherwise the site is broken) very inconvenient. And if you ask about it, they (people in related forums like reddit) tell you "well you should never use it. NOOP should be sufficient. If not, the rules are wrong and you should report to the rule author(s)." This is cool but it didn't solve my immediate problem that a site I want to visit is broken by uBo. I learned later, again from uBo subreddit, that you can double press ctrl to temporarily enable this feature back -- which is more than enough for me -- but how the hell do you even discover this? And I never remembered what the two columns for adding dynamic rules are supposed to be -- since there is no headers.
multimoon 2y ago
The problem is that as much as I want Firefox to be a better browser than chrome - Blink is still a far better rendering engine than anything else. Every other browser either has inferior performance (including Firefox) or is just a fork of chrome. I spent a year trying to use Firefox after being a chrome user for well over a decade - I eventually switched back when Mozilla started adding the same tracking features that chrome started out with years ago. Mozilla seems to be going down the same path, albeit several years behind and slowly. After that I just didn’t see a reason to not just use chrome if I’m going to have to neuter tracking bullshit anyway since it’s still much more performant than Firefox. V3 complaint UB exists (UBo Lite) and works plenty fine save for what even I (as a power user) would call power user features. It’s very annoying that Google is going down this route, and I really want Firefox to be the better browser, but I just don’t think it is yet. During my year of usage you definitely can notice the performance difference and the inconsistency in certain webpages.
stiltzkin 2y ago
[dead]

It works better in Firefox anyway. Use Firefox and be happy: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

codevark 2y ago

[dead]

neves 2y ago

Another alternative is to use Brave Browser

ElectroNomad 2y ago
Wdym? It’s also a chromium browser i.e. it’ll lose uBlock as well eventually
- Scokee 2y ago
  Why do you think this would happen? Brave incorporates ublock as part of their Rust based adblocking library https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust
  - josephcsible 2y ago
    Because eventually there will be enough changes to the upstream Chromium codebase that the only way to keep these extensions working would be to stop following upstream, which would mean massively increased development costs.
    - porridgeraisin 2y ago
      But they don't do adblocking with ublock, so it'll be safe
    - joecot 2y ago
      Chrome is going to continue supporting v2 extensions for enterprise users, so presumably it'll be pretty trivial to keep support for everyone else.
      - josephcsible 2y ago
        Google says that's only going to last one additional year, not forever.
  - gertop 2y ago
    They don't use ublock.
- tapoxi 2y ago
  Brave has a native ad blocker built in, so it's unaffected by changes in the extension API.
- yett 2y ago
  "For as long as we’re able (and assuming the cooperation of the extension authors), Brave will continue to support some privacy-relevant MV2 extensions—specifically AdGuard, NoScript, uBlock Origin, and uMatrix" https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/ https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/
  - gaws 2y ago
    Why take the word of the developers of a Chromium-based browser, some of whom may not even be part of the project in the long run? Firefox is built on an entirely different engine and doesn't have this problem.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
mrinfinitiesx 2y ago
And catch another chromium 0day, good idea
Larrikin 2y ago
Using any Chromium browser supports Google's goal of controlling all web standards
webspinner 2y ago
I do this, and run Ubo on top of it. Mostly for social media tracking purposes.

attentive 2y ago

same, but it does have a warning: "This extension may soon no longer be supported because it doesn't follow best practices for Chrome extensions."

ac130kz 2y ago
No, it does not. Firefox still fully supports those manifest v2 handles.
- attentive 2y ago
  My response was to a comment that it's still available on chrome store. I no longer see that comment. Assuming it was deleted, does HN change parent comments if parent was deleted? - that's misleading. I didn't comment on firefox at all.
  - BenjiWiebe 2y ago
    Afaik deleted comments do not affect the hierarchy - comments are still shown as children of a comment that is marked as deleted and has no content. It sure looks like you replied to the wrong comment by accident.
  - DavideNL 2y ago
    > "My response was to a comment that it's still available on chrome store. I no longer see that comment. > Assuming it was deleted, does HN change parent comments if parent was deleted? - that's misleading." That's not possible as far as i know; What is possible, is that the original commenter EDITED their comment to a different text, soon after they posted it.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago
  People keep saying that and it's true. Also every extension on firefox that I installed said "I need permission to do whatever i want with your browser", which made me really uncomfortable

KingOfCoders 2y ago

Firefox has a vested interest (money) now for people to watch (their network) ads. Expect to move Firefox to drop uBlock too (written in Firefox with uBlock)

alphan0n 2y ago
Is this supposed to be an argument for Chrome? They had their chance and blew it. If Mozilla proves unviable we’ll move from Firefox to the next entity that isn’t hostile to their user base or make one that isn’t.
- soganess 2y ago
  You say that like web rendering engines grow on trees... At this point your (multi-platform) options are: - Chrome + its kin - Firefox + its kin There is one/two new "third" browsers/engines in the works that will be ready "who knows when". The shift you'd make is from Firefox to something based on Firefox / Chrome... then you wait and hope that Ladybird actually gets somewhere or that the Servo engine doesn't take another forever to mature... and someone builds a browser around it. I'd call that mighty slim pickings. Especially considering how beholden the downstream browsers are to the upstream ones, particularly for smaller projects.
- KingOfCoders 2y ago
  No it's an argument against the comment "It works better in Firefox anyway"
knowitnone 2y ago
If and when that happens, then I will move off Firefox
- KingOfCoders 2y ago
  Where to? Sadly I'm on Windows and there are no more options that I can see. So it will be dual boot again in the future I guess + Ladybird.

thrdbndndn 2y ago

I absolutely agree with that from a technical perspective, but in typical usage, the users won't notice any difference. To be honest, I think uBo almost become a cult (which is nothing wrong, to be clear). It has lots of very opinionated development progress happened/happening to it, and most of them are irrelevant for majority of users (even the "power" users). And if I dare to say, it's at the cost of its UX. For example, a few years ago, uBo disabled the ability to "greenlight" a domain (i.e. adding a whitelist dynamic rule) by simply clicking in the (advanced) popup. The official reason is that it's the most misused features, which is true, but it makes legitimate use of it (to whitelist a 3rd-party domain for a specific site because otherwise the site is broken) very inconvenient. And if you ask about it, they (people in related forums like reddit) tell you "well you should never use it. NOOP should be sufficient. If not, the rules are wrong and you should report to the rule author(s)." This is cool but it didn't solve my immediate problem that a site I want to visit is broken by uBo. I learned later, again from uBo subreddit, that you can double press ctrl to temporarily enable this feature back -- which is more than enough for me -- but how the hell do you even discover this? And I never remembered what the two columns for adding dynamic rules are supposed to be -- since there is no headers.

multimoon 2y ago

The problem is that as much as I want Firefox to be a better browser than chrome - Blink is still a far better rendering engine than anything else. Every other browser either has inferior performance (including Firefox) or is just a fork of chrome. I spent a year trying to use Firefox after being a chrome user for well over a decade - I eventually switched back when Mozilla started adding the same tracking features that chrome started out with years ago. Mozilla seems to be going down the same path, albeit several years behind and slowly. After that I just didn’t see a reason to not just use chrome if I’m going to have to neuter tracking bullshit anyway since it’s still much more performant than Firefox. V3 complaint UB exists (UBo Lite) and works plenty fine save for what even I (as a power user) would call power user features. It’s very annoying that Google is going down this route, and I really want Firefox to be the better browser, but I just don’t think it is yet. During my year of usage you definitely can notice the performance difference and the inconsistency in certain webpages.

stiltzkin 2y ago

[dead]