Hacker News Reader

Comment by edoceo | Hacker News Reader

BigG couldn't do that (disable other user hostile media) because it would interfere with ads.

Now I'm looking for a gif and canvas blocker for FF mobile. Any hints on how to tune uBO?

You can just block all <canvas> tags with a `##canvas` rule for uBlock Origin. It of course breaks some real sites, but not on anything I use regularly. A canvas repaint rate limit could be nice, though I have been surprised at how little I notice all canvas tags just being blocked.

Gifs are trickier. I'll often see non-animated images in gif format. Because of extension API limitations, uBO can't block gifs based on file size or animation frame count. (file size isn't even known until the start of the fetch)

Though Firefox at least does lets you disable all gif animations without just blocking all gifs.

Gifs are trickier. I'll often see non-animated images in gif format. uBO doesn't have the power to block images based on file size. (The file size isn't even known until the start of the fetch)

Browsers' native functionality (if not deliberately crippled) and filtering proxies can definitely block animated GIFs while leaving static ones alone, by simply terminating the connection after the first frame.

IE6 or even lower had the option to show and load only the first frame.

You can't turn off gifs or canvas because it would just break too much internet.

I could imagine and equal reaction thread here if google deemed some gifs and canvas uses "unworthy" and were blockable.

This is not an excuse - the user should have the freedom to disable whatever they want - who is to say that your definition of a broken internet matches mine?

This.

If I, the user, disable some functionality and the site doesn't work I can:

A: add the site to an allow list B: temporarily enable the feature for that site C: stop using the site

Most of the time I'll give a site the benefit of the doubt, only when they pull shady tricks like dark patterns and whatnot do I just stop using the site.

Reddit is a great current example. I will not use their site or their app because they're both awful, and reddit is trying to force the app down my throat. If the app I use gets shut down by API changes I'll just stop using reddit.

Not sure how it would break the internet at all, can you say that you have ever had a user experience improved by auto playing anything?

I mean, heaven for bid, they could the user the ability to actually control the repaint rate. Or pull only the first frame of a gif, and not pull the 100+ meg gif without user consent(via touch, by site, etc..) Browsers wouldn't block popups for years because it could break legitimate use, now I don't think a single browser doesn't ship with that option not on by default.

I think the reality is, that these are features and functions that advertisers want, and google is in the business of selling ads.

This isn't a can't, its a won't.

Agree -- I mean even Buzzfeed of all sites usually doesn't auto-play their gifs[0]; you get a static image with a play button that swaps to the gif when you click it.

[0] Just realized while typing this that I haven't clicked a Buzzfeed link in a long time, so my memory might be off. But I know some site I used to visit frequently did this.

> You can't turn off gifs or canvas because it would just break too much internet.

That sounds like a challenge.

I think if there were a click to play button on gifs > N megabytes or > X*Y resolution, nobody would complain, nor would they complain about click to play on frequently updated canvases.

I suggest using uBlock Origin https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-...

Why limit it based on resolution? When 'disable autoplay' is selected, i would like play button for all videos, animated GIFs or animated SVGs.

It what way would putting a play button on gifs above a certain file size break the internet?

Another organisation's guiding principles suggest an alternate viewpoint:

Individuals must have the ability to shape the internet and their own experiences on it.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/

Mozilla's slogan used to say "putting users in control", which was then silently(?) replaced with "individuals":

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10040344

It's a very convenient phrasing, because these "individuals" certainly are doing what they say; it's just that they are not you. I trust Mozilla only slightly more than Google.

I see "individuals" as generally preferable to "users", though possibly less clear as to ... er, use role.

Turning off canvas only breaks tracking. Very few sites require it to work. Firefox will ask you to enable it on a per-site bases by enabling privacy.resistFingerprinting.

Canvas is video (or spyware). If I don't want autopay video, I don't want autoplay canvas.

It would be nice if the browser knew how big the gifs were before it downloaded them, and thus didn't download anything over a certain size.

Isn't the size in the header? (Which yea, could be faked, or sent as Chunked) the USER-agent could just make a cap, and stop after 1mb when image/gif media type

HTTP allows the body length to be specified in the header before the body is downloaded via the `Content-Length` header. It also allows you to stream the body in chunks by setting the `Transfer-Encoding` header to `chunked`, as you've mentioned, in which case each chunk starts with its own length. In both cases, the length cannot be faked because the recipient will stop pulling bytes after the specified length, as that's the purpose of sending such length (after there's no more bytes according to the latest length, the connection is free to be used for a subsequent response)!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com