this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2026
2021 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
87348 readers
3849 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- 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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So, I can finally point and laugh at the people who were saying that the manifest V3 thing was a non issue because their ad blocker was still working ?
no, because their ad blocker is still working
At a lower efficiency than before, and a lot of stuff now won't get blocked because of the limit in definitions.
yeah, my point is that was never the concern of such people
Define "lower efficiency", please.
only ads on big sites or ads by big providers are blocked. cookie prompts and other annoyances much less, because there is a great variety of them. data mining and hardware fingerprinting cannot even be thwarted anymore.
sure, if you only care about ads, but not at all about your privacy, it does not mean much to you. personally I would rather see ads (topic based) than give up my privacy, and the complete uBlock Origin is very useful for privacy too.
This is false.
Not part of any adblocker. Some, like Ghostery, have a separate mechanism to auto-reject these. I switched from uBO to Ghostery because uBO wasn't doing anything against those.
That's not an adblock feature and there are hundreds of other extensions that handle that, like PrivacyBadger. Ghostery says it also handles trackers, but I haven't verified that.
Look up tools made specifically for it, then. Also: privacy related stuff is not affected by Manifest v3, no?
this is false. and instead of just claiming so, here is proof: there are built-in (but disabled by default) blocklists specialized for cookie prompts and such
and as I said, uBO is not just an ad blocker, so saying xy ad blocker can replace it well is false.
except that not really. Because again, the required browser APIs were removed, and even before that, privacy badger was not so effective
everything is effected that:
Let me rephrase then: cookie prompt blocking capabilities are not tied to the Manifest version (clearly, as exemplified by things like Ghostery). uBO could easily switch to Mv3 and still do those things.
But we're discussing the ad-blocking features, because these are the ones affected by Mv3, no?
All these other features exist and are perfectly fine in other extensions.
Define "not so effective". What's "effectiveness" in this case?
OK, but again: what's the difference for the end-user? Does it impact resources utilisation? Website loading times? Reactivity? I don't see a difference in how my uBO browser behaves vs how my Ghostery browser behaves, so what am I losing because of the Mv3 switch?
never said otherwise.
no. that is not the only feature affected by Mv3. it is just the most noticeable feature affected.
ublock has many tools to defuse tracking mechanisms. it can fake browser mechanisms, it can stop scripts when they do a certain thing, it can replace entire javascript functions. it can modify outgoing network requests and incoming responses to them in many ways, which privacy badger does not implement. I don't want to include multiple pages of text here, so please go through the wiki pages of the uBlock Origin github repository, because it details all the capabilities and technical details.
but as even the main uBlock Origin maintainer says, the addon wouldn't be worth anything without all the community sourced filter lists with quick fixes and specific blocking instructions for lots of websites. compared to that, privacy badger does not use filterlists. it can only do things that can apply to any website without breaking it, and that limits the options a lot.
I'm starting to think that you might be not arguing in good faith. but it is certain that we are going in circles and I'm wasting my time. you should look up the wast documentation of uBlock Origin and you will get all the answers, if you are genuinely interested. there are probably even technical comparisons between uBO and lite from the maintaners
Fair. What I still don't understand is the level of impact this has. Considering I'm not being tracked in any noticeable way, or that I'm not seeing any ads, I just don't get why people in this post are acting like uBO being blocked is a significant downgrade to the user experience.
Sounds like someone not arguing in good faith would say, if anything. How is me trying to understand the impact of the mechanisms used by uBO vs those used by, say, Ghostery, "arguing in bad faith? WTF are you talking about?
I will not. Because I get the technical details, a bunch of people already talked about them here. But nobody was able to tell me what do these features actually do compared to other adblocks.
lol. can you give me a few examples when tracking is noticeable? because I don't know any, other than when sites show me consent prompts and privacy policies with obvious lies.
how? you do not seem to be trying to understand this.
you are wrong. you do not get the technical details. Otherwise you would not be saying stupid things like "I'm not being tracked in any noticeable way".
I have had enough. I will assume you did not find the information yourself because your favorite search engine only gives useless AI slop instead of information, so here is most things you need to know: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)
Various forms of suggested content based on searches/purchases, etc.
People mentioned the technical differences a bunch of times. If you mean that I should get a PhD in network traffic and filtration to fully understand how these technical differences affect end-user experience, then yeah, i guess I'm not trying to understand it.
If not - maybe you'd be the first to give me some actual info?
None of this explains what I"m looking for. Seems like you're arguing in bad faith. :)
Now I'm curious how anyone could possibly have a non obvious definition of ad blocker efficiency.
Well, considering I'm using a different adblock and I just... Do not see any ads on the web, how do you measure the efficiency of uBlock to be better? Resource consumption?
No, because ad blocks work perfectly fine.
I’m using Ghostery on Vivaldi (Chromium-based) and it works perfectly fine, including blocking ads during YouTube videos.
No idea why uBlock specifically is being blocked, but it’s not like you can’t have an ad-blocker anymore.
Out of curiosity, why do you use Ghostery rather than uBlock Origin? It was quite controversial back in the day, but seems to be open source and stuff now. I still don't see any advantage over uBO, though, so I wonder what would move you to use it instead.
I started using Ghostery because it had a cookies auto-reject mechanism. The ad-blocking stuff came in later, which I didn't even realise, but I installed it first on a new device, did some browsing, noticed there's no ads, and thought "well, good enough".
I do miss the custom HTML-element cutting, though.