Firefox encountered a sad
-
I see it all the time at work: all the boomers rawdogging the web on Edge, like the company IT department intended.
You can still get uBlock Origin for Edge.
-
You can still get uBlock Origin for Edge.
Not on the company managed installs. They only allow a couple of plugins. Not that my colleagues would know what they're missing.
-
I'd some plans to write my own e-pub reader, since all the existing ones are shite in their own way, but since e-pub files are secretly xhtml and css in disguise, it's actually a hell of a job, much bigger than I'd anticipated.
I don't think making network requests for files nor parsing any of those formats is so difficult, and while the actual layout rules interact in a complicated way they're not insurmountable. However, doing it securely and in a way that runs at an acceptable speed is much harder. Tokenizing JS and interpreting it isn't so bad, but that's not going to run a modern website with tens of thousands of lines of scripts. Displaying video with hardware acceleration? Best bust out some code.
Moving to another protocol will either need the cooperation of everyone everywhere all at once, or since that'll never happen, alternatively convincing all the major browser manufacturers to support both for a while so that other companies can enter the market, which will also never happen. Going to be a tough sell.
You're correct but besides implementation effort I personally think the web has become too "free" or "rich".
I don't actually like that every website has a slightly or sometimes completely different layout, design philosophy, tech stack etc. Often this freedom is just used to display ads everywhere, track users or to look "on brand" but it's difficult to find the actual content (as user, but also if you want to find it programmatically). With web assembly it's become even more opaque. It's also pretty difficult to do anything dynamic (not a static website) in a secure way. Most of the common frameworks and CMS have a ton of dependencies and almost every one of them can impact safety in a negative way.
Not that I want to get rid of it completely. There are certainly a lot of websites that make good use of the freedom to create a unique and worthwhile experience but for a very very large part of the web (company information, blogs, wikis, forums etc) I'd prefer something much more simple that's more straight to the point.
E.g. personally I was super sad that the usenet died and thought (especially at the beginning) that web forums where a big downgrade. Same with early web chats compared with IRC.
-
I need chrome for work. And only ever use it for work. Because work sucks like that.
My work requires edge 🤮
-
My work requires edge 🤮
Condolences friend.
-
And I'm grateful for these people. If everyone was using adblockers then companies like Google and advertisers would try even harder to break adblockers so it's best if some amount of the population continues to browse without adblockers so I can get ad free access to the internet
This is my favorite take on this site. Thank you.
-
It's fine for now it's just beholden to upstream which isn't in a good state, not actually independent. I'm certainly being hyperbolic.
Yes that's fair, wish there was a truly independent browser available.
-
And I'm grateful for these people. If everyone was using adblockers then companies like Google and advertisers would try even harder to break adblockers so it's best if some amount of the population continues to browse without adblockers so I can get ad free access to the internet
It’s naive to think they’re not trying as hard as they can. Companies are not allowed to stop going for more, if 99% of all users didn’t block ads, they’d go just as hard after the 1% that did.
-
Didn't make Chrome Adblockers unusable a while ago? Are 90% of the people now using chrome with ads??
They always were. Chrome on mobile has never supported add-ons, and that's been the main driver of browsing for a while now.
Desktop Chrome still has ad-blockers, but they're just less effective now, as they can't phone home for faster updates iirc.
-
They always were. Chrome on mobile has never supported add-ons, and that's been the main driver of browsing for a while now.
Desktop Chrome still has ad-blockers, but they're just less effective now, as they can't phone home for faster updates iirc.
The most significant changes was around the webRequest API, used to intercept and modify network requests. uBlock Origin used the API to block unwanted content before it loads. Google killed it because they want to force their ads and tracking on users.
-
it's really a lifesaver for us lactose intolerant folk. regular uBo gives me gas.
It's something 80% of the population suffers from! Might be linked to vaccines.
-
Europe is not golden. New european laws are getting more and more authoritarian.
You may end with a browser thar automatically ask you for a id to log all your browsing "for the children!"
Fuck every EU politician, that dreams of Palantir spy tech.
-
It’s naive to think they’re not trying as hard as they can. Companies are not allowed to stop going for more, if 99% of all users didn’t block ads, they’d go just as hard after the 1% that did.
I'm sure they are not sitting on their hands but if someday it started affecting their profits at a larger level, they'd put far more resources into anti ad block I think than they do now, also Chrome has already made ad blockers difficult to run on chrome which I guess was their endgame, thankfully non chrome based browsers like Firefox and Safari still exist so I'll continue supporting them, hopefully ladybird is also successful
-
uBoL sucks A LOT compared to uBo.
Can you elaborate? Does it let some ads through?
-
Can you elaborate? Does it let some ads through?
They had to remove a lot of features for uBoL to be MV3-compliant.
