Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by caminante | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

caminante

Not really.

90% of users won't notice a difference.

Here's the feature diff. [0]

[0] https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...

View on HN

I've been trying uBO Lite myself for a few months, and anyone who uses YouTube will absolutely notice that it's worse at blocking. Lite tends to delay playback at the start of a video for as long as the blocked ads would've been, making the site feel slower, and once in a while an ad will slip past the blocker anyway.

I am not so sure if that is the light version. In my (outdated) Ungoogled Chromium which still has classic uBlock, YouTube videos also have delays or do stop playing completely after a few seconds. So I have switched to the FreeTube software to watch YouTube videos. I can recommend that.

I have used Youtube and uBlock Origin lite for the past couple of months and have not noticed that. Are you using the complete filtering mode?

Just use Freetube to browse Youtube. It's a better experience in every respect.

I really really miss Zapper Mode

It would be nice if uBO automatically got replaced with uBL instead of requiring users to manually install it. A lot of users who might've had uBO installed by someone else won't know how or won't care enough to do it.

  > Not really.

Straight from the FAQ you linked:

  In general, uBOL will be less effective at dealing with websites using anti-content blocker or minimizing website breakage.

Sooo... yes really?

Yes pedantically, not really. :)

You scroll past multiple paragraphs that say "maybe. maybe not" and "it depends on your browsing" to cherrypick a quote qualified with "in general."

LOL! You know that's bad faith.

i mean what's the breaking point? why is ublock no longer in the store whole the lite is?

ublock is manifest v2, lite is v3.

Manifest v3 removed access to certain APIs that where used to alter the websites to block ads

Reply on news.ycombinator.com