Hacker News Reader

Comment by curt15 | Hacker News Reader

Safari has the same manifest v3 limitations that preclude the full-blooded ublock origin you get with Firefox.

I notice no difference using AdGuard (in basic mode, with only the content blocking rules and no page read access) in Safari or uBOL in basic mode on Chrome vs. using UBO on Firefox. And in uBOL’s case you can always increase the filtering level if you’re willing to grant the extension read access to pages to basically match uBO. You can even hide/delete elements or add your own custom rules.

I feel like most people who make MV3 complaints didn’t bother actually trying it, they just repeat the default anti-MV3 talking points.

I personally notice a lot of difference between AdGuard and UBO.

AdGuard just blocks much less.

Does it block ads in youtube videos?

Yes.

The MV3 API isn't enough to block YouTube ads on their own, but Safari ad blockers which also include web extension API blocking can see enough traffic to block YT ads. 1Blocker does this, and even StopTheMadness Pro's blocking have enough flexibility to do it.

Google serves ads and videos from the same servers. Adblock can't use DNS to drop the ads without dropping videos too. Ublock in firefox sees the actual content in my browser and can distinguish youtube videos from ads.

But how does ublock origin lite, the v3 version, blocks adverts on youtube just fine?

Google doesnt turn on MV3 and have it break ads day one that would highlight a negative change for users. Google wants people to move to MV3 and notice no difference and then they can start chipping away later.

It's cute that you think they have level of sophistication in their strategy.

It doesnt require sophistication. Just implement MV3 and then when the conversation about adblockers comes up make a note that its probably not wise to cut it as extensions have switched to MV3 and its a controversial topic. Its easy to see how different teams would come to this without collaborating, its the MV3 team doing what they do and the ad block team reading the room.

Why don't they lean into ad blockers and making the web less shitty? Is it because the web staying shitty makes people use apps instead?

I’m sure that is a part of the reason. I hate apps with a passion…

It's because with the way that the most capable adblockers are built, they can't function without injecting code into every page and intercepting traffic. The privacy implications for someone installing an adblocker extension with malicious intent (or more commonly, a formerly legit blocker gets bought and gets turned malicious in an update) are dire.

I don't buy it. Your browser itself does these things, Apple could bake their own into the browser.

Safari never supported the API’s needed for uBlock Origin. That said, Safari also has its own API available for blocking stuff

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/cre...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com