3 ms·
ublock doesn't work on quite a few sites, whereas I've never had an issue with adblock. Couple of examples off the top of my head: 1. giphy: it removes the sha
by findjashua 12y ago
ublock doesn't work on quite a few sites, whereas I've never had an issue with adblock. Couple of examples off the top of my head:
1. giphy: it removes the share and twitter buttons
2. doesn't block ads on hulu
There were others as well that I seem to be forgetting (I remember having to disable it on quite a few sites). Good intention (lowering memory consumption), but the execution still has some way to go.
- sprokolopolis 12y agoSome of those share/tweet/like buttons can track you without no interaction, just by loading on the page. Removing them might be intentional for this reason.
- findjashua 12y agoTrue, but imho an ad blocker should just block ads by default. I'm not sure if I'm representative of most users, but I don't really care as much about tracking, just about ads cluttering the page.
- gorhill 12y ago> an ad blocker should just block ads by default First sentence on the project page: "µBlock is not an ad blocker; it's a general-purpose blocker."
- findjashua 12y agotouche!
- quadrangle 12y agothis is just different filter presets. You can change the filters. In my case, I had ABP doing all that same blocking, only I had to opt-in, whereas with ublock that blocking is opt-out.
- findjashua 12y agofair enough, but if you're going to compare ublock to ABP, as a user my expectations from it are going to be like those from ABP. By default it should work like an ad-blocker, with an option to block other stuff. For users like myself, who don't really care about tracking, just about ads cluttering up a page or delatying a video, blocking out stuff other than ads just 'breaks' the site.
- quadrangle 12y agoWhy should it have to have those same assumptions and defaults? In my view, it's fundamentally better to block that other shit too.