Technology

34838 readers

29 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

303

Mozilla downsizes as it refocuses on Firefox and AI (techcrunch.com)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

102 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (6 children)

Here is a graph the illustrates the block efficiency of ublock+Firefox compared to other browsers with/without ublock. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox

Despite the URL name, it shows bare browse Brave and Firefox+ublock compare at blocking 3rd party ads/trackers. It looks like this was updated November of last year.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Brave isn't represented anywhere on the graph? Unless I've misunderstood you. That's a comparison of Firefox with various ad blockers, and uBO with and without CNAME unclocking enabled. Brave also uncloaks CNAMEs, so that's one place they are equal. Chromium based browsers do lack some abilities compared to Firefox, however. I have daily driven Firefox since the first day, but Brave and Blink/Chromium based browsers are undeniably faster at rendering (unfortunately).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Look at the bottom of the graph. Each grouping is per browser.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes of course. I hadn't slept when I replied, how embarrassing to miss that. You can enable CNAME uncloaking in Brave, which I suspect draws them to a parallel. It would be interesting to see the test repeated with the setting enabled. Since one has to (or had to) enable it in uBO also, it would only be fair to compare apples to apples. As I said, the blocker in Brave is based on uBO anyway. To be clear, and as I've said before, I've daily driven Firefox since the beginning and run uBO in medium mode. I'm not shilling for Brave here, simply pointing out that the differences are small (much of the code is shared with uBO) and it does certainly render faster.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I do understand that you aren't shilling brave. Ublock medium mode is great and I think worth the effort. I wish Firefox had some of the native features present in chromium browsers (mostly quality of life features like native force dark mode on web contents). But I love the extent that Firefox can be taken to reduce not just fingerprinting, but also avenues of attack.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You can force Firefox to display dark mode in web content (even with privacy tweaks enabled to resist fingerprinting or tracking), by setting the two following hidden prefs in your user.js:

// PREF: enable a Dark theme for browser and webpage content
// [TEST] https://9to5mac.com/
user_pref("ui.systemUsesDarkTheme", 1); // HIDDEN
user_pref("browser.in-content.dark-mode", true); // HIDDEN

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Does this force dark mode on pages or just what. I couldn't get it to work anywhere close to chomiums force dark mode.

load more comments (2 replies)