3 ms·

This conspiracy theory doesn't make sense because safari's content blockers (ie. the nerfed version of adblock) block most ads just fine, especially from google

by gruez 2y ago

This conspiracy theory doesn't make sense because safari's content blockers (ie. the nerfed version of adblock) block most ads just fine, especially from google ads. The only ads that get through are first party ads (eg. youtube), but as of a few years ago adblockers could block those as well, so it's a moot point.

jorvi 2y ago
Yup. I understand that nerfing adblocking is definitely a big draw for Google, but Apple went the ManifestV3 route many years before, specifically to increase extension performance and privacy. Back then there was a big uproar too, but mostly because Safari extension developers charged for a new version because they had to rewrite the entire thing.
- zarzavat 2y ago
  > specifically to increase extension performance and privacy This reasoning is so bogus that it’s hard to believe anybody could believe it in good faith. Ad blockers are essential for performance and user privacy and security. If Apple truly bought into this reasoning then they’d integrate an ad blocker like Brave does. Follow the money.
  - jorvi 2y ago
    It is not bogus. It does increase privacy because the extension no longer sees what pages you load or your web content. And it is indeed more performant. And Apple does care because later on they started to allow blockers to spread blocking rules over multiple sub-extensions. Initially they were limited on... 15 000 rules? Can't quite remember.
TechBro8615 2y ago
Safari content blockers are not enabled in embedded Web Views.
- IshKebab 2y ago
  Neither is uBlock Origin.
  - connicpu 2y ago
    I get uBlock origin whenever apps open a browser view that uses my default android browser (Firefox) e.g. when I click links in the reddit app.
basisword 2y ago
Safari content blockers are awful compared to UBlock and I’m a Safari user. Not only does YouTube either get through or cause weird issues, YouTube now blocks you until you completely disable the extension. Content blockers often block cookie banners too which can often result in broken functionality - a nightmare when you’re trying to buy tickets to something and have to “reload without blockers” for the website to work.
- gruez 2y ago
  >Not only does YouTube either get through or cause weird issues, YouTube now blocks you until you completely disable the extension Works fine on my machine. You might need to update your filter lists or try another content blocker app. >Content blockers often block cookie banners too which can often result in broken functionality - a nightmare when you’re trying to buy tickets to something and have to “reload without blockers” for the website to work. So don't enable the filter lists that try to block cookie banners?
  - epiecs 2y ago
    Can you recommend a blocker? I have one (adblock pro), but I cant seem to find where to update the lists and sometimes YT does weird things :)
    - gruez 2y ago
      https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047223162 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047... There's also a new extension that was posted on hn a few weeks that's free and claims to have scriptlets to block youtube ads as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43204406#43208085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43204406#43208085
    - dredmorbius 2y ago
      Bypass the YT website entirely. You can perform video search through DuckDuckGo, Invidious, or Piped. The latter two are often blocked themselves, copy the video URL and feed to mpv to play through your preferred video player on the command-line: <https://mpv.io/ https://mpv.io/>
wkat4242 2y ago
For me the element blockers are the most important of all. It's not just about blocking ads. It's about making websites more usable. Ads are only one of those detrimental points. Many websites bombard you with big photos of their articles. I block all that with custom blocklists so the end result is a lot more like here at hacker news.
- gruez 2y ago
  If you're talking about element blocking, that's still doable in manifest v3 with injected css elements. That's how it was done in manifest v2.
  - wkat4242 2y ago
    Is it? I didn't realise. I always use Firefox anyway. So which part isn't possible now? JavaScript injection? Ps changed the term to avoid confusion, thanks!
    - gruez 2y ago
      >So which part isn't possible now? The webRequestBlocking api, which allows the extension to inspect all request/responses in real time and act on them. With manifest v3 the extension can only supply a list of expressions to block, and the expressions that can be used is very limited.
- gear54rus 2y ago
  Taking this as an opportuinty to pitch an extension I developed to do that and more: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/web-defuser/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/web-defuser/ The main difference between this and current element blockers is that Web Defuser allows you to block annoying behaviors (by modifying requests/responses in flight) in addition to elements. At the moment it's a bit lacking in the UI department, I'd appreciate early adopter feedback (you can contact me at gmail with my username).
hombre_fatal 2y ago
You're downvoted so much that I can't even read your text without copy and pasting it. But you're right. When I'm using Safari with 1Blocker, I don't even notice that I'm not using Chrome with uBlock Origin. And it accomplishes that with static rules instead of with an API that reads every request.

by gruez 2y ago

jorvi 2y ago

Yup. I understand that nerfing adblocking is definitely a big draw for Google, but Apple went the ManifestV3 route many years before, specifically to increase extension performance and privacy. Back then there was a big uproar too, but mostly because Safari extension developers charged for a new version because they had to rewrite the entire thing.

zarzavat 2y ago
> specifically to increase extension performance and privacy This reasoning is so bogus that it’s hard to believe anybody could believe it in good faith. Ad blockers are essential for performance and user privacy and security. If Apple truly bought into this reasoning then they’d integrate an ad blocker like Brave does. Follow the money.
- jorvi 2y ago
  It is not bogus. It does increase privacy because the extension no longer sees what pages you load or your web content. And it is indeed more performant. And Apple does care because later on they started to allow blockers to spread blocking rules over multiple sub-extensions. Initially they were limited on... 15 000 rules? Can't quite remember.

TechBro8615 2y ago

Safari content blockers are not enabled in embedded Web Views.

IshKebab 2y ago
Neither is uBlock Origin.
- connicpu 2y ago
  I get uBlock origin whenever apps open a browser view that uses my default android browser (Firefox) e.g. when I click links in the reddit app.

basisword 2y ago

Safari content blockers are awful compared to UBlock and I’m a Safari user. Not only does YouTube either get through or cause weird issues, YouTube now blocks you until you completely disable the extension. Content blockers often block cookie banners too which can often result in broken functionality - a nightmare when you’re trying to buy tickets to something and have to “reload without blockers” for the website to work.

gruez 2y ago
>Not only does YouTube either get through or cause weird issues, YouTube now blocks you until you completely disable the extension Works fine on my machine. You might need to update your filter lists or try another content blocker app. >Content blockers often block cookie banners too which can often result in broken functionality - a nightmare when you’re trying to buy tickets to something and have to “reload without blockers” for the website to work. So don't enable the filter lists that try to block cookie banners?
- epiecs 2y ago
  Can you recommend a blocker? I have one (adblock pro), but I cant seem to find where to update the lists and sometimes YT does weird things :)
  - gruez 2y ago
    https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047223162 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-adblock-privacy/id1047... There's also a new extension that was posted on hn a few weeks that's free and claims to have scriptlets to block youtube ads as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43204406#43208085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43204406#43208085
  - dredmorbius 2y ago
    Bypass the YT website entirely. You can perform video search through DuckDuckGo, Invidious, or Piped. The latter two are often blocked themselves, copy the video URL and feed to mpv to play through your preferred video player on the command-line: <https://mpv.io/ https://mpv.io/>

wkat4242 2y ago

For me the element blockers are the most important of all. It's not just about blocking ads. It's about making websites more usable. Ads are only one of those detrimental points. Many websites bombard you with big photos of their articles. I block all that with custom blocklists so the end result is a lot more like here at hacker news.

gruez 2y ago
If you're talking about element blocking, that's still doable in manifest v3 with injected css elements. That's how it was done in manifest v2.
- wkat4242 2y ago
  Is it? I didn't realise. I always use Firefox anyway. So which part isn't possible now? JavaScript injection? Ps changed the term to avoid confusion, thanks!
  - gruez 2y ago
    >So which part isn't possible now? The webRequestBlocking api, which allows the extension to inspect all request/responses in real time and act on them. With manifest v3 the extension can only supply a list of expressions to block, and the expressions that can be used is very limited.
gear54rus 2y ago
Taking this as an opportuinty to pitch an extension I developed to do that and more: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/web-defuser/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/web-defuser/ The main difference between this and current element blockers is that Web Defuser allows you to block annoying behaviors (by modifying requests/responses in flight) in addition to elements. At the moment it's a bit lacking in the UI department, I'd appreciate early adopter feedback (you can contact me at gmail with my username).

hombre_fatal 2y ago

You're downvoted so much that I can't even read your text without copy and pasting it. But you're right. When I'm using Safari with 1Blocker, I don't even notice that I'm not using Chrome with uBlock Origin. And it accomplishes that with static rules instead of with an API that reads every request.