Let’s travel back to when memes were new, anyone could get their 15 minutes with a silly dance, and the amount of data tech companies collected about you was slightly less creepy. Mozilla reunited some of the biggest names in late ‘aughts memedom for its “come back to Firefox” campaign. [Media: https://youtu.be/E2AoYIKwJqM]
  • pimento64@sopuli.xyz
    3·
    3 days ago

    No, ublock origin actually has specialized features that in-browser adblockers don’t replicate.

          • pimento64@sopuli.xyz
            21·
            2 days ago

            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.

            • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
              1·
              2 days ago

              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.

          • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
            11·
            2 days ago

            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.
            • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
              1·
              2 days ago

              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.

              • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
                21·
                2 days ago

                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.

                • artyom@piefed.socialEnglish
                  1·
                  2 days ago

                  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.

                  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
                    1·
                    2 days ago

                    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.