Uninstall Chrome (includes Edge, Brave, Vivaldi & many more) and replace with Firefox plus uBlock Origin
Problem solved
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
146 points (92.4% liked)
Technology
59169 readers
2325 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- 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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I personally prefer LibreWolf (Firefox based)
I think we should stop sending people to alternative "Firefox based" browser that will likely break compatibility even more than it is broken on Firefox. It will only frustrate the user and send him back to random chromium based alternative like brave. Firefox default privacy settings are more than enough for the regular user.
I didn't say it's good for most people, I just prefer it and think other privacy oriented people should as well
I understand. I am sure that most, if not all people who care about privacy already use Firefox. We need to help regular users to hope into Firefox. These people tend to know almost nothing about computers and a site that doesn't work is Firefox not working.
Yeah but Firefox uses non private defaults like Google as the default search engine
We need to rid chrome of its monopoly first. Google is a privacy nightmare but it's only because of chrome hegemony over the browser ecosystem that they are able to forcibly DRM the web and castrate adblockers.
I’ve seen LibreWolf mentioned a few times. What’s the difference between the two?
LibreWolf is just hardened Firefox
load more comments
(9 replies)
Why the recommendation for Firefox in this matter since ublock is promising support for multiple browsers?
Because Google broke how websites load in Chrome specifically to destroy adblock. They can punch holes in any adblocker that uses the Chromium web rendering engine. However Firefox does not use any Chromium code and still works the way it always has. uBlock (use uBlock Origin instead) will likely still work somewhat on Chorme, but would be helpless to block some ads.
This may be true for chrome, but as far as I can tell anyone building chromium can also change that open source code to not break ad blockers?
While in theory that is true, Chromium is still mostly controlled by Google. Some people may decide that they are going to maintain forks of Chromium that strip out certain features of Chromium, but the pace of development is relentless, releasing new builds several times per day. It would take some seriously deep pockets to be able to staff developers who can keep up with the contributions from Google and Microsoft and others and ensure their fork remains up to date and not broken.
So yes, someone could change that open source code, but it’s really not feasible in the long run, and so Google (and to a lesser extent Microsoft), can control the browser experience for the majority of desktop users, including things like Manifest V3 or that “Digital DRM” that we were hearing about a while back.
Installing adblocker on Chrome is kind of like putting on a rain jacket once you're already wet.
It doesn't solve the problem they still throw a warning every three videos. Brand new Firefox install with only u block. Both at latest version you block updated daily
Hmmm, weird.
Anyway, cross-posting one of my favorite random comments from some other cool person I saw in a thread the other day :
Android :
iOS :
- Yattee with this guide
Web :
Desktop :
TV :
Android TV - SmartTubeNext
Apple TV - Yattee with this guide
This is awesome! Thanks for sharing!
I'd like to add onto this and mention this app that I found while trying out the Android apps you listed. It's called PipePipe
This guy needs a medal
Nice to see that other people find the list I put together useful
All this accomplishes is doubling down my resolve to never give youtube a penny
Cable, its cable now.
YouTube wants users to allow ads or sign up for Premium.
Youtube wantses, Youtube don't getses. Just like Gmail wantsed and I moved to another email provider. They want the money to stop shoving the ads, but still keep the tracking going. Well, I'm the product or the customer, I can't be both.
And I'm serious about keeping Revanced updated ☺️
And uBlock Origin
I switched my VPN to Moldova and I haven't seen a add, some of these small countries it's not worth it to have ads.
Ideally we would have an ad blocker that interacts with the ads themselves in background.
Youtube doesn't even serve ads to me if my useragent is a crawler.
Oh, interesting.
Care to share the string?
Pretty soon we're going to need an adblock blocker blocker
Ublock origin has it already, it's been a few years now. I think it just blocks the JavaScript code that checks if the ads are being played (not sure though)
This is the best summary I could come up with:
YouTube is broadening its efforts to crack down on ad blockers.
The platform has “launched a global effort” to encourage users to allow ads or try YouTube Premium, YouTube communications manager Christopher Lawton says in a statement provided to The Verge.
YouTube confirmed that it was disabling videos for users with ad blockers in June, but Lawton described it as only a “small experiment globally” at the time.
Over the past several weeks, more users with ad blockers installed have found themselves unable to watch YouTube videos, with a post from Android Authority highlighting the increase in reports.
YouTube has made several changes to the way ads operate on its platform this year.
YouTube is likely hoping that its lengthy ad breaks drive more users to sign up for its ad-free YouTube Premium subscription, but a $2 price hike and the discontinuation of its cheaper Premium Lite plan might make the option less attractive.
The original article contains 290 words, the summary contains 154 words. Saved 47%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›