6 ms·

HTTPSB just isn't userfriendly enough for me. I run Adblock (not plus though) + Ghostery, and perhaps they use more memory and CPU, but if they do I've never no

• jzelinskie 12y ago
  I think a lot of people get the opposite feeling. HTTPSB lets you see everything in the matrix and toggle what you want to show. If you want the carefree experience you can use this strategy[0] to unblock everything and only rely on the blocklists to which you subscribe. I currently use this method and I all I really want now is a block list for cookies (and one as good as Ghostery's list). [0] https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/How-to-use-HTTP-Switchboard:-Two-opposing-views#the-allow-allblock-exceptionally-approach https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/How-to-use-H...
  • pandog 12y ago
    But I don't want to use a strategy, I want to click a button and have adverts blocked.
    • Sprint 12y ago
      Then HTTPSB is not the right extension for you.
      • nikolak 12y ago
        Then it should not be compared to adblock.
        • pritambaral 12y ago
          That is not what is happening in the post. Only the filtering/element-hiding capabilities of both are being compared.
          • Karunamon 12y ago
            That is exactly what is happening in the headline, however.
        • josefresco 12y ago
          I don't follow this logic. Both do generally the same thing, but with different approaches. This to me would make a comparison of the two different approaches very valid.
      • TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
        You are calling HTTPSB an alternative for Adblock Plus. One of the major use cases of Adblock Plus is effectively "Fire and Forget" mode - enable it and then don't worry about it. You are saying HTTPSB does not support this use case. As such, I don't see why you can call it an alternative to Adblock Plus.
        • deleted 12y ago
          [deleted]
        • Justsignedup 12y ago
          It is an alternative. to all of like 1000 people worldwide who are willing to figure it out. So basically fire-and-forget mode, or broke.
        • pessimizer 12y ago
          That's like saying that walking isn't an alternative to driving because there's no wheels. It's different, has a superset of functionality, and a different interface. It isn't a fork of ABP.
          • Justsignedup 12y ago
            Walking from New York to California to transport 15 tons of perishable cargo VS driving a truck with a refrigeration unit. Your analogy fails.
            • Executor 12y ago
              Your analogy fails too. I use a manual javascript blocking add-on (noscript) instead of an automatic blacklisting one and its not a deal-breaker. Minor effort required.
          • TheLoneWolfling 12y ago
            It does not have a superset of functionality. Adblock Plus / Edge has a "Fire and Forget" mode, as I described in my grandparent comment. HTTPSB does not. Hence, HTTPSB's functionality is not a superset of Adblock Plus/Edge's functionality.
• idlewan 12y ago
  You can allow everything by default too with HTTPSB (it still will use blocklists and protect you), so that you won't have to enable stuff for a website to work.
  • nkvoll 12y ago
    I've been clicking around its user interface for a few minutes now, but I can't figure out how to do this.. Is it adding "whitelist *" somewhere or something similar?
    • nkvoll 12y ago
      Seems like it was the power-button looking icon found in the upper left part of the extension dropdown menu when on an actual page. I expected this to be a part of the extension settings / options, but ah well.
      • gorhill 12y ago
        The power button is what I call "hard" allow all, i.e. it turns off completely matrix filtering. The "all" cell (top left corner of the matrix) is a "soft" allow all, i.e. it allows everything except those hostnames and types of request which are not specifically blacklisted.
• doczoidberg 12y ago
  I first had problems with it too. You have to disable matrix filtering on all sites.
  • andreasvc 12y ago
    Is the extension equivalent to a /etc/hosts file at that point?
    • doczoidberg 12y ago
      I don't know /etc/hosts You can block specific things like iframes on domains.
      • andreasvc 12y ago
        It's a very simple method that can prevent hostnames from resolving; see http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/zero/ http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/zero/ Compared to other adblocking methods it's fast and does not use a lot of memory, but it's limited in what it can block (namely connections to specified hostnames).
• sabret00the 12y ago
  Sorry to be slightly off-topic, but since you mention NoScript and are familiar with that, this (HTTPSB) and ABP, can I ask. Is HTTPSB more of a NoScript alternative or an ABP alternative?
  • zorbo 12y ago
    From the little experience I have with HTTPSB, I'd say that it was more of a NoScript alternative. It feels to me like a webbrowser firewall. They seem to have moved into the adblocking field now though. Here's how I see it: * Adblock (Plus): Blocking ads, No / minimal user action required * NoScript: Blocking scripts. Lots and lots of user action required. * Ghostery: Block privacy intrusions. Basically an application-level firewall for the browser. In a normal firewall, you'd block e.g. port 80 from IP x.x.x.x. In an appliction firewall you simply block, for instance, bittorrent traffic. Minimal user interaction required, and where it is required, it's very easy to use. * HTTPSB: A low-level web browser firewall ("block port 80 from IP x.x.x.x) that now also does (better) adblocking. The adblocking is on par with Adblock (plus): no user action required. The browser "firewall" is basically unusable. Lots of user interaction required, and when it is required, it's basically impossible to understand.
    • Justsignedup 12y ago
      Sounds a lot like we need some volunteers to build a better UI for simple (adblock mode), a 2nd option to do a noscript equivalent, and a 3rd option for wild-west-browser-firewall mode.
  • beagle3 12y ago
    I have the impression it's mostly a RequestPolicy replacement; but not using Chrome I haven't actually had a chance to use it.
• gorhill 12y ago
  Well the article was specifically to challenge the claim that the problem of ABP memory consumption was mostly residing with Firefox. But in any case, regarding your point, you can set up HTTPSB as an ad blocker and forget about it: https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/HTTP-Switchboard-as-an-ad-blocker https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/HTTP-Switchb... Advantage over ABP is that it discloses to you what is still not blocked, and you act on this information if you wish so.
• u124556 12y ago
  I think the point is they can port the code back to ABP so it can benefit from it. It's not a competition.