pimento64 comments on Firefox’s new ad tries to remind you of a time before the internet sucked.

You need sources that a browser extension has more features than a browser's built-in feature? This is not debate club. Point your eyeballs at the screen.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

What "screen"?

If you don't want to provide sources, that's your prerogative. But don't expect not to be treated like a fool for it.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 0 points 6 days ago (1 child)

The screen you're looking at. I didn't need additional proof of your absent reading comprehension skills, but it's appreciated.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 6 days ago

Okay enough nonsense babble. Goodbye.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Not the person you replied to but copied directly from https://ublockorigin.com/

Lite vs. full uBlock Origin

Choose Lite when…

You use current Chrome or Safari.
You want filtering modes with relatively little setup.
Its browser-supported filters cover the sites you visit.

Choose full uBO when…

You use Firefox on desktop or Android.
You need dynamic filtering, the request logger, or advanced per-site controls.
You rely on filter syntax that Lite cannot support.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 1 week ago (7 children)

I don't know what that has to do with the conversation. For the third time, we're talking about a native implementation. Not an extension.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 week ago* (6 children)

This seems to be a bit of a miscommunication. But an extension is not native. And all versions of Ubo are extensions, something else doesnt exist.

You can define native a few different ways in english language so i get how it might be confusing if its not your first, but its similar to how a mod for a game is not native to the game.

When you mentioned “native adblock in chromium” That does exists and it requires no extension. But they are never as fully featured as the full Ubo extension which only works on firefox. Which is what this comparison is about.

I hope that helps.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

When you mentioned “native adblock in chromium” That does exists and it requires no extension.

Yes. That's what I'm referring to when I said 3 times that it's not an extension.

But they are never as fully featured as the full Ubo extension

But it is. It's the exact same functionality, built into the browser, natively.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago* (4 children)

I am going to do my best to explain the technical side in simple terms.

Chromium browsers use something called manifest V3.

V3 is a google designed “upgrade” to manifest V2 and it blocks certain advanced features provided by comprehensive adblocker like Ubo.

Wether an adblock is native or an extension does nothing to circumvent the native limitations of V3 that exists on all chromium browsers. If you have proof such hack exists that would actually be a technews worthy event.

The only (mainstream) browser that still supports V2 is firefox. Which is therefor the only browser that allows all the features of the full ublock origin. Firefox has no inbuild adblocker to compare to a chromium one.

I can believe that the features that work on V3 encompass your personal needs and that of many other people. But they are literaly not the same.

Some examples of features included in comprehensive v2 adblockers that are limited on v3 are:

(Not a full list)

per site dynamic filtering
per site disabling of javascript
more detailed logger
filters relying on runtime logic
more comprehensive element picker

I (and the Ubo developers) would be happy to see any proof that shows otherwise.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] artyom@piefed.social 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Wether an adblock is native or an extension does nothing to circumvent the native limitations of V3 that exists on all chromium browsers

As I've already stated several times, that's simply not true. MV3 literally only applies to extensions. But thanks for dumbing it down for me.

I can believe that the features that work on V3 encompass your personal needs

This has nothing to do with my "personal needs", this is a technical discussion.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago* (2 children)

Apparently you're right that MV3 only restricts extensions, not native blockers. I stand corrected on that part.

However, uBO on MV2 still has features that no known native ad blocker on a Chromium-based browser offers.

The closest match I could find is Brave Shields, but it still lags behind on per-site control, mainly because it has no dynamic filtering matrix, and it has no logger comparable to uBO's. That most of the list i already mentioned multiple times.

To date, nothing matches or beats Firefox + uBO, so the original point still stands. The burden of proof that shows the contrary is on you for that.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments