• Engywuck
    link
    fedilink
    English
    03 months ago

    You don’t need extenssions when you have capable inbluit adblockers. Stop fear mongering.

    • @unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Unless by built in, you mean the ublock that comes with librewolf, thats fucking stupid. Adblocking is an armsrace that requires constant up to date collaboration on the adblock developer side. Thats why you need crossplatform plugins like ublock, otherwise you will end up seeing ads.

      • Engywuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        thats fucking stupid

        Thanks, I respect you too.

        I’ts been 3 years since I last used uBO and I hace still to see a single ad on my browser. But you do you.

        • @unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I did not call you stupid, i called the things that you wrote stupid. Those are two very different things. You called the best practices, recommended for any user that wants to safely use a normal web browser, “fear mongering”. That is in fact a very stupid thing to do.

      • @fne8w2ah@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        Vivaldi browser also has a built-in ad blocker on all platforms, but the PC/Mac/Linux version also allows you to use uBlock Origin as well (at least until mid-2025).

      • Engywuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        No, Vivaldi, Brave and Opera have builtin adblockers which don’t depend on the extensions manifest. Plus, one could always rely on AdGuard, which whould block ads system wide.

      • Engywuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Everybody knows that Chrome, the only browser made by Google, has a built-in adblocker. /s

        Being called names just for stating the obvious. Typical lemmy.

        It’s not my fault if Mozilla won’t bother implementing a decent adblocker and have to rely on an external unpaid developer to keep FF afloat.

        • @PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          03 months ago

          But see, you didn’t even read my comment. I made a joke that you were a Google employee and you reply:

          Being called names just for stating the obvious

          From the bottom of my little perogi heart I issue a deep sorry for hurting your feelings with that. From this moment forward I’ll do better!

        • @communism@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          03 months ago

          Firefox is a browser, not an adblocker. Why would they make their own adblocker when there are already independent adblockers that are very good? I would suggest Firefox just come pre-installed with uBlock Origin

          • Engywuck
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            “Firefox is a browser, not an ad measurement tool. What would they sneakily introduce an OPT-OUT ad efficacy measurement tool”?

            People would really do anything to justify Mozilla’s bullshit.

            • @communism@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I don’t justify Mozilla’s bullshit, and I don’t use upstream Firefox for that reason (I use LibreWolf). Asking Mozilla to implement their own adblocker is asking them to reinvent the wheel. They should ship Firefox with uBlock Origin pre-installed like I said. Asking Mozilla to write their own adblocker which will likely be less effective than a third-party adblocker, is absolutely not the same thing as justifying them sneaking in opt-out PPA. How on earth do you even see those things as remotely comparable

              I’m saying that your suggestion is ridiculous, not that what Mozilla is currently doing is correct.

    • lemmyvore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      03 months ago

      I’ve done tests with the built-in Firefox strict mode vs uBlock and there’s a bit of a difference. Firefox blocks about two thirds, uBlock is almost 100%.

      • William
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        I think they were talking about the built-in ad blocker that certain other (not firefox or chrome) browsers have, instead of UBlock.

      • Engywuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        Firefox doesn’t have a proper adblocker. It’s just a tracker blocker.

    • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      03 months ago

      Every thread that mentions Firefox draws hate from you. It’s tiring and your points are never good.

      • Engywuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        03 months ago

        Cool. Just block me and get rid of my not so good posts.

        • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          03 months ago

          Or you could stop raging about the only choice we have against a browser monopoly. You don’t have to make up excuses to hate it and then broadcast them to an audience who mostly disagrees

    • katy ✨
      link
      fedilink
      English
      03 months ago

      isn’t that worse considering then any filter lists could only be updated when the browser gets updated?