this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2026
2018 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
87337 readers
4010 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That will totally lead to websites not supporting or even blocking Firefox. Together with uBlock capitulating against Facebook and all those age registration nonsense, I really am scared about the future of the web.
Meh if a site doesnt work on firefox I move on. I dont want all the shit that comes with visiting from chrome. If I cnt buy because of cookies or ads then I wont buy from them.
first it was the news sites, then the shops and venues, but I didn't speak up because I haven't used them anyway.
then the utiliies companies did that, but I didn't speak up, so far as I can pay the invoices personally it's not a big deal.
then came the government sites, but meh, I can just go in person! sure it takes away many hours but it's not worth the hassle to complain!
and by that time nothing else was left either, because all the other sites dropped support in the meantime, while I did not have the time anymore to notice it.
Fair point, I am speaking up though, I wont give them my money.
A lot of websites that really should be testing for this don't work on Firefox.
Absolute worst case Firefox can focus on feature parity(as it already has a lot of), and lie on the UserAgent
Kids today don't know that's how life started for Firefox. Except the browser it had to copy was closed source.
When I did a site that didn't play nice with one of my various Mozilla Gecko/Fusion browser flavors, I try a different one.
When they all are failing, not just WaterFox, I either fire up DuckDuckGo Browser or Safari if on a Mac.
If that were to fail I probably would quit using that service.
My actual Google account isn't allowed on most of my computers anymore, since I DeGoogled, and only have it operating in very sandboxed environments like one Vivaldi browser that lives inside of a VM.
I jumped to i2p for this reason. I think internet is dead, we will have to have a double identity to avoid brainrotting
and reddit is aggressively try to force thier login popup at everytime, it hasnt rolled out completely. but people already reported.
What are people who were IP banned supposed to do? We can't sign in because we were banned. I hate ai but at least when I have a question I used to ask reddit it give me an answer at least close to what I'm looking for.
i notice just today, they are hiding comments until you login. seems like a new development, thats not being reported or posted anywhere. i waited a whole year and a different fork to make a new account, i thinks its safe to wait a long time before using reddit again.
I would have to get a new router which is doable if I absolutely needed to but I'm now getting a phone any time soon unfortunately. But honestly? It was just a time suck. All I did was argue with stupid people. I think I'm better off without it.
Yep with the login for old.reddit I've officially stopped using it completely. No I will not run their Javascript.
That's what the user agent string spoofer is for.
Other adblocks still work. I’m using Ghostery on Vivaldi (Chromium-based) and it works perfectly fine, including blocking ads during YouTube videos.
No idea why uBlock specifically is being blocked, but it’s not like you can’t have an ad-blocker anymore.
because google took away the API for network traffic filtering. all that current filtering addons can do is pass a very brief, rarely updated network filter list to the browser, and insert cosmetic tweaks to the pages you visit. they can't look anymore at all details of any network request and decide what do to. except on Firefox, where it has not been taken away.
OK, sure, but what are the actual, real-life consequences of that?
I don't see any ads online. So ad-blocking still works. What doesn't work?
uBlock Origin and any other effective content blocker had that as its most important weapon, without exaggeration. it has many other techniques for specific circumstances, but preventing to load the ad scripts, and preventing network requests that send back data to the advertising company, are universally a powerful tool.
you don't see them because addons can still insert unlimited cosmetic tweaks. CSS snippets that make specific elements hidden. but the ads are still loaded, consuming network and CPU resources, and the ad framework still collects usage, interaction and device data.
also, the addons now can't regularly update the lists even for what cosmetic tweaks to apply. google has decided it does not allow addons in their addon store that fetch filterlists from the network. this means these addons need to embed the lists in themselves. list updates are released much less frequently, and can have several days delay while google decides whether the updated version contains something malicious or otherwise unacceptable to their policies. compared to that, uBlock Origin on Firefox updates the lists every day by default, with no delay, as it fetches the lists directly from their websites.
You're just repeating what you already said.
My question is: since there are (and always have been) other privacy-oriented extensions (e.g. Privacy Badger, Ghostery) and they still work just as they always have, what is the advantage of specifically using uBO with Mv2?
I just loaded up YouTube and didn't see a single call to a known ad server, so this seems to be false.
Also: the CPU usage of loading even a couple MB-worth of ads is negligible compared to the overall resource hungriness of Chromium.
I did notice that every now and again YouTube would block me from using it due to detecting the adblocker, but is that an inherent disadvantage of Mv3? And why wouldn't the extension developers then embed the updated filter lists and just release them as extension updates? Does Google limit the frequency of those?
of course you didn't. on youtube ads are not served from different domains. have you ever heard about pihole not being able to block youtube ads? that's why. every ad is literally a video uploaded to youtube, it is even possible to watch them as videos, with their own video page.
not always the case, differs by ad and ad framework, but the memory savings are still significant. and the difference matters more on weak computers, old computers, battery powered computers and when you are on a metered network.
I don't know if that's what causes that. but not being able to update filterlists independently means that nobody can react quickly to when a website starts detecting a content blocker, or when ads start reappearing. the needs to wait for the next addon update, which may take multiple days.
because all addon updates go through a review. the effectiveness of it is largely debatable, but it delays updates significantly.