6 ms·

I tried uBlock Origin Lite for a very short time. Then I realized that in Lite, the user can’t add custom rules[0]. That’s when I had enough. So now I’m using F

by cpach 2y ago

I tried uBlock Origin Lite for a very short time. Then I realized that in Lite, the user can’t add custom rules[0]. That’s when I had enough. So now I’m using Firefox instead, where I can use uBlock Origin. [0] See https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1in2ls4/ublock_origin_lite_adding_custom_rules/ https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1in2ls4/ubloc...

xattt 2y ago
It’s only a matter of time before the modern Phoebus cartel starts blocking Firefox.
- KronisLV 2y ago
  > It’s only a matter of time before the modern Phoebus cartel starts blocking Firefox. I feel like nobody will have to consciously do anything in particular, with the current way how things are going. - Chromium is the modern IE and developers will primarily be on the hook for supporting it, Firefox support will be an afterthought so some sites will just be broken, moving more users over to Chromium. - The Firefox marketshare is dwindling, it's likely that the users with proper ad blocking will eventually be a rounding error and therefore quite inconsequential. Especially if there are any more ad-related APIs pushed by Chrome that make users more profitable (e.g. Topics API). - Even among tech enthusiasts, Mozilla in particular doesn't have very good reputation (e.g. how much they spend on actually improving the browser vs other initiatives) and I don't see the marketshare of Firefox skyrocketing, unless something big happens. New competitors like Ladybird are also niche, though it's a really cool project. - If Apple ever moves over Safari to Chromium, like Edge did, then that effect will only be amplified.
  - slig 2y ago
    >Firefox marketshare is dwindling It's basically non-existing already (less than 4% globally) [1] and with basically zero mobile presence. [1]: https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#top-browsers-user-agents https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#top-browsers...
    - ayewo 2y ago
      In spite of its dwindling usage, Firefox is still used by more than a 100 million people on desktop. I posted this comment some days ago [1]: To put some numbers on what a 2.54% market share means, Firefox actually tracks this data. See here: https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity: > Monthly Active Users (MAU) measures the number of Firefox Desktop clients active in the past 28 days. > February 10, 2025: 163,203,913 clients > February 17, 2025: 163,742,671 clients 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43219572 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43219572
      - tim333 2y ago
        Probably quite a few people like me who use both Chrome and Firefox.
  - bambax 2y ago
    Yet I genuinely don't understand how people can tolerate the modern web with ads? It's possible some people accept it because they don't know any better, but I have never seen anyone going back once they realize it's possible to get rid of the pollution; I have never heard anyone say "where dit the ads go? I miss them". So maybe it's just our responsibility as power users to educate our friends more?
    - bonoboTP 2y ago
      The more people block ads, the bigger the incentive for companies to invest in blocking blockers. In a way, it's in the interest of power users to keep their tricks obscure so it's not worth to eliminate these options.
    - webspinner 2y ago
      I honestly don't understand it either! I'm a screen reader user, and if I had to use the web without adblock, it would take me a lot longer!!! However, I have friends who also use screen readers who do!!
- cpach 2y ago
  I hope you’re wrong but yeah, who knows. I’m glad that Ladybird is under active development and seems to be making progress.
- mykhamill 2y ago
  We were seen as failing a security audit recently for having firefox installed on some of the development laptops and got ordered to remove it by IT who conceeded that it was stupid but had to check boxes for insurance is ISO standards. This causes the majority of people to only be exposed to Edge/IE or Chrome at work, and use their phones the rest of the time.
- jocoda 2y ago
  I can live with that. By blocking Firefox they would self identify as user hostile in the same way that google has done with V3. I think this would a huge step forward, a massive shit filter.
  - stvltvs 2y ago
    A certain amount of websites are mandatory today, like local utilities, employer chosen health insurance, etc. I have to keep Chromium around for some that don't work right with Firefox.
brylie 2y ago
They mention "other browsers" in addition to Firefox that will continue to support Manifest v2, but I can't find a list. Does anyone know off-hand the additional browser options for Manifest V2 and multiple-OS support?
- lionkor 2y ago
  Anything based on Firefox, like LibreWolf, as well
- mort96 2y ago
  I think some Chromium-based browsers like Brave have pledged that they'll keep v2 around for as long as it's practical? Though IMO, people who depend on Manifest v2 with Chromium forks are running on borrowed time, Chromium moves fast and I can't imagine that keeping the Manifest v2 code working will be very easy. Especially if Google takes advantage of the limited access extensions now have to the HTTP request flow to do major refactors in that area.
  - masklinn 2y ago
    Yep, currently brave (and others I assume) switch it on at build time, when Google removes that from chromium they may move it to their patch set, but who knows how long they’ll keep that once it starts breaking.
    - lifthrasiir 2y ago
      The dynamic web request hook is the only thing still relevant in MV2, right? Are there any other features to be backported from MV2?
      - lillecarl 2y ago
        I've tried to understand what makes this so incredible impossible to maintain by asking people, I feels like FUD from the FF community (which I'm a part of) because it's all just wishywashy statements that it'll be impossible to maintain.
yuvalr1 2y ago
I simply cannot give up the option of zapping distractions off of my screen. I really cannot understand how people can use Youtube or even a Youtube embedded video without zapping away the distractions. There is no way I'm coming back to Chrome if they don't support manifest V2. It's Firefox for me.
- bonoboTP 2y ago
  I'm also using it to remove distractions from stack exchange sites like hot network questions. I can stay focused on solving my problem much better if my eyes can't wander to interesting unrelated stuff.
- cpach 2y ago
  Just for the record: uBlock Origin Lite can block ads, but the user can’t add their own custom rules.
- TiredOfLife 2y ago
  I use uBlock origin lite and there are no ads on youtube or embedded youtube videos
  - lnl 2y ago
    The parent comment is talking about distractions, not ads. YouTube has plenty of those, even embedded YouTube videos, unless you pause the video before it ends. uBlock Origin Lite cannot block elements except through packaged rulesets, and while there are some ad-blocker lists that are meant to block annoyances on pages in addition to ads, everybody has a different idea on what is an annoyance on a webpage.
    - yuvalr1 2y ago
      exactly. I was not referring to ads, but to annoying suggestions in embedded videos (also when the video is paused!), and even to the long and mostly useless suggestions list on the right of the screen. I want to use YouTube as a useful tool, not to waste my time in endless loops of "oh, that looks interesting!"
muixoozie 2y ago
For anyone else like me that hasnt tried uBO lite wondering what features are missing: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
- RamRodification 2y ago
  There seem to be quite a lot of other nice features which also do not work on Chromium-based browsers even with the v2 version of uBO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin#Limitations_in_Chromium-based_browsers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin#Limitations_in_C...
klabb3 2y ago
Many years ago I switched to chrome because ff felt sluggish. That’s all fixed since a long time. Not sure why so many seems to be choosing chrome today.
QuantumGood 2y ago
Chrome with Ublock origin works through June 2025, via "browsers using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will be exempt from any browser changes until June 2025". Discussion on how to enable: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41812638 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41812638
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
After trying both, I prefer Matrix to Origin. However I do not rely on extensions/add-ons as I believe extensions/add-ons are not the right solution. Unless the computer user is compiling the browser herself, extensions/add-ons can be crippled/disabled/etc. by whomever is distributing binaries. When the distributor is supported by online advertising as is the case for both Chrome and Firefox, and all the other so-called "modern" graphical browsers, this possibility cannot be ignored.

by cpach 2y ago

xattt 2y ago

It’s only a matter of time before the modern Phoebus cartel starts blocking Firefox.

KronisLV 2y ago
> It’s only a matter of time before the modern Phoebus cartel starts blocking Firefox. I feel like nobody will have to consciously do anything in particular, with the current way how things are going. - Chromium is the modern IE and developers will primarily be on the hook for supporting it, Firefox support will be an afterthought so some sites will just be broken, moving more users over to Chromium. - The Firefox marketshare is dwindling, it's likely that the users with proper ad blocking will eventually be a rounding error and therefore quite inconsequential. Especially if there are any more ad-related APIs pushed by Chrome that make users more profitable (e.g. Topics API). - Even among tech enthusiasts, Mozilla in particular doesn't have very good reputation (e.g. how much they spend on actually improving the browser vs other initiatives) and I don't see the marketshare of Firefox skyrocketing, unless something big happens. New competitors like Ladybird are also niche, though it's a really cool project. - If Apple ever moves over Safari to Chromium, like Edge did, then that effect will only be amplified.
- slig 2y ago
  >Firefox marketshare is dwindling It's basically non-existing already (less than 4% globally) [1] and with basically zero mobile presence. [1]: https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#top-browsers-user-agents https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#top-browsers...
  - ayewo 2y ago
    In spite of its dwindling usage, Firefox is still used by more than a 100 million people on desktop. I posted this comment some days ago [1]: To put some numbers on what a 2.54% market share means, Firefox actually tracks this data. See here: https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity: > Monthly Active Users (MAU) measures the number of Firefox Desktop clients active in the past 28 days. > February 10, 2025: 163,203,913 clients > February 17, 2025: 163,742,671 clients 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43219572 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43219572
    - tim333 2y ago
      Probably quite a few people like me who use both Chrome and Firefox.
- bambax 2y ago
  Yet I genuinely don't understand how people can tolerate the modern web with ads? It's possible some people accept it because they don't know any better, but I have never seen anyone going back once they realize it's possible to get rid of the pollution; I have never heard anyone say "where dit the ads go? I miss them". So maybe it's just our responsibility as power users to educate our friends more?
  - bonoboTP 2y ago
    The more people block ads, the bigger the incentive for companies to invest in blocking blockers. In a way, it's in the interest of power users to keep their tricks obscure so it's not worth to eliminate these options.
  - webspinner 2y ago
    I honestly don't understand it either! I'm a screen reader user, and if I had to use the web without adblock, it would take me a lot longer!!! However, I have friends who also use screen readers who do!!
cpach 2y ago
I hope you’re wrong but yeah, who knows. I’m glad that Ladybird is under active development and seems to be making progress.
mykhamill 2y ago
We were seen as failing a security audit recently for having firefox installed on some of the development laptops and got ordered to remove it by IT who conceeded that it was stupid but had to check boxes for insurance is ISO standards. This causes the majority of people to only be exposed to Edge/IE or Chrome at work, and use their phones the rest of the time.
jocoda 2y ago
I can live with that. By blocking Firefox they would self identify as user hostile in the same way that google has done with V3. I think this would a huge step forward, a massive shit filter.
- stvltvs 2y ago
  A certain amount of websites are mandatory today, like local utilities, employer chosen health insurance, etc. I have to keep Chromium around for some that don't work right with Firefox.

brylie 2y ago

They mention "other browsers" in addition to Firefox that will continue to support Manifest v2, but I can't find a list. Does anyone know off-hand the additional browser options for Manifest V2 and multiple-OS support?

lionkor 2y ago
Anything based on Firefox, like LibreWolf, as well
mort96 2y ago
I think some Chromium-based browsers like Brave have pledged that they'll keep v2 around for as long as it's practical? Though IMO, people who depend on Manifest v2 with Chromium forks are running on borrowed time, Chromium moves fast and I can't imagine that keeping the Manifest v2 code working will be very easy. Especially if Google takes advantage of the limited access extensions now have to the HTTP request flow to do major refactors in that area.
- masklinn 2y ago
  Yep, currently brave (and others I assume) switch it on at build time, when Google removes that from chromium they may move it to their patch set, but who knows how long they’ll keep that once it starts breaking.
  - lifthrasiir 2y ago
    The dynamic web request hook is the only thing still relevant in MV2, right? Are there any other features to be backported from MV2?
    - lillecarl 2y ago
      I've tried to understand what makes this so incredible impossible to maintain by asking people, I feels like FUD from the FF community (which I'm a part of) because it's all just wishywashy statements that it'll be impossible to maintain.

yuvalr1 2y ago

I simply cannot give up the option of zapping distractions off of my screen. I really cannot understand how people can use Youtube or even a Youtube embedded video without zapping away the distractions. There is no way I'm coming back to Chrome if they don't support manifest V2. It's Firefox for me.

bonoboTP 2y ago
I'm also using it to remove distractions from stack exchange sites like hot network questions. I can stay focused on solving my problem much better if my eyes can't wander to interesting unrelated stuff.
cpach 2y ago
Just for the record: uBlock Origin Lite can block ads, but the user can’t add their own custom rules.
TiredOfLife 2y ago
I use uBlock origin lite and there are no ads on youtube or embedded youtube videos
- lnl 2y ago
  The parent comment is talking about distractions, not ads. YouTube has plenty of those, even embedded YouTube videos, unless you pause the video before it ends. uBlock Origin Lite cannot block elements except through packaged rulesets, and while there are some ad-blocker lists that are meant to block annoyances on pages in addition to ads, everybody has a different idea on what is an annoyance on a webpage.
  - yuvalr1 2y ago
    exactly. I was not referring to ads, but to annoying suggestions in embedded videos (also when the video is paused!), and even to the long and mostly useless suggestions list on the right of the screen. I want to use YouTube as a useful tool, not to waste my time in endless loops of "oh, that looks interesting!"

muixoozie 2y ago

For anyone else like me that hasnt tried uBO lite wondering what features are missing: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...

RamRodification 2y ago
There seem to be quite a lot of other nice features which also do not work on Chromium-based browsers even with the v2 version of uBO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin#Limitations_in_Chromium-based_browsers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBlock_Origin#Limitations_in_C...

klabb3 2y ago

Many years ago I switched to chrome because ff felt sluggish. That’s all fixed since a long time. Not sure why so many seems to be choosing chrome today.

QuantumGood 2y ago

Chrome with Ublock origin works through June 2025, via "browsers using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will be exempt from any browser changes until June 2025". Discussion on how to enable: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41812638 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41812638

1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago

After trying both, I prefer Matrix to Origin. However I do not rely on extensions/add-ons as I believe extensions/add-ons are not the right solution. Unless the computer user is compiling the browser herself, extensions/add-ons can be crippled/disabled/etc. by whomever is distributing binaries. When the distributor is supported by online advertising as is the case for both Chrome and Firefox, and all the other so-called "modern" graphical browsers, this possibility cannot be ignored.