Comment on Chrome will block one of its biggest ad blockers

• thingsiplay@beehaw.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Its still the same extension, same source code, same logic, just less capable; hence the addition of “Lite” to the name. Originally they wanted release the Lite version with same name, but changed it Lite, so people don’t get confused why its not longer blocking everything it blocked before.

  source

  • HK65@sopuli.xyz ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    same logic

    That’s the point, it isn’t. The good old version was built on logic where the browser would send the downloaded webpage to the extension, and uBO could weed out ads and trackers, and give you the sanitized version. uBOL works completely differently, as it has to ask the browser to clean it out, but the browser will ultimately decide what to actually do, and there are already limitations that impact ad blocking, as the browser won’t accept enough changes to block all the different kinds of shit that comes through.

    The other big difference in logic is distribution, uBO relies on outside blocklists to keep up with Google changing Youtube several times a day to keep sending you malware, in the new system, this is not allowed, so it’s on Google to approve a new blocklist as fast as they do their changes - they won’t.

    It’s going to be less capable, it’s going to be exactly as capable as Google wants. It might as well be named the Google Ad Blocker if only that didn’t discount the insane work the uBO team does to keep up with Google’s shit.

    source

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      @Kissaki@beehaw.org @baggins@baggins@lemmy.ca @ivn@ivn@jlai.lu Apologies. I think you guys are right about this, its actually killing the old plugin (in Chrome). Thanks all for explanation, I know understand why that is.

      source
  • ivn@jlai.lu ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I don’t think it’s the same source code (uBOL vs uBO. And it’s definitely not the same logic, that’s the whole point, blocking with MV3 must be done in a declarative way.

    source
  • Kissaki@beehaw.org ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Its still the same extension, same source code, same logic, just less capable

    the same… but not the same… ??

    I think the technologies are quite different.

    uBOL is entirely declarative, meaning there is no need for a permanent uBOL process for the filtering to occur, and CSS/JS injection-based content filtering is performed reliably by the browser itself rather than by the extension. This means that uBOL itself does not consume CPU/memory resources while content blocking is ongoing – uBOL’s service worker process is required only when you interact with the popup panel or the option pages.

    Are you claiming non-lite does the same, plus more?

    source
  • baggins@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The developer specifically released the light version because they acknowledged that it is not the same and you need to make the explicit choice of what you want to keep using

    source