Proof that you know one that does?

Apparently you’re right that MV3 only restricts extensions, not native blockers. I stand corrected on that part.

However, uBO on MV2 still has features that no known native ad blocker on a Chromium-based browser offers.

The closest match I could find is Brave Shields, but it still lags behind on per-site control, mainly because it has no dynamic filtering matrix, and it has no logger comparable to uBO’s. That most of the list i already mentioned multiple times.

To date, nothing matches or beats Firefox + uBO, so the original point still stands. The burden of proof that shows the contrary is on you for that.

I am going to do my best to explain the technical side in simple terms.

Chromium browsers use something called manifest V3.

V3 is a google designed “upgrade” to manifest V2 and it blocks certain advanced features provided by comprehensive adblocker like Ubo.

Wether an adblock is native or an extension does nothing to circumvent the native limitations of V3 that exists on all chromium browsers. If you have proof such hack exists that would actually be a technews worthy event.

The only (mainstream) browser that still supports V2 is firefox. Which is therefor the only browser that allows all the features of the full ublock origin. Firefox has no inbuild adblocker to compare to a chromium one.

I can believe that the features that work on V3 encompass your personal needs and that of many other people. But they are literaly not the same.

Some examples of features included in comprehensive v2 adblockers that are limited on v3 are:

(Not a full list)

• per site dynamic filtering
• per site disabling of javascript
• more detailed logger
• filters relying on runtime logic
• more comprehensive element picker

I (and the Ubo developers) would be happy to see any proof that shows otherwise.

This seems to be a bit of a miscommunication. But an extension is not native. And all versions of Ubo are extensions, something else doesnt exist.

You can define native a few different ways in english language so i get how it might be confusing if its not your first, but its similar to how a mod for a game is not native to the game.

When you mentioned “native adblock in chromium” That does exists and it requires no extension. But they are never as fully featured as the full Ubo extension which only works on firefox. Which is what this comparison is about.

I hope that helps.

Not the person you replied to but copied directly from https://ublockorigin.com/

Lite vs. full uBlock Origin

Choose Lite when…

• You use current Chrome or Safari.
• You want filtering modes with relatively little setup.
• Its browser-supported filters cover the sites you visit.

Choose full uBO when…

• You use Firefox on desktop or Android.
• You need dynamic filtering, the request logger, or advanced per-site controls.
• You rely on filter syntax that Lite cannot support.

At my work all the laptops are touchscreen.

The majority of users dont know this. With a few rare exception those that do know still never use it.

Its was sometimes used by IT for doing certain bulk procedure on multiple laptops at once. This procedure is rarely required anymore since a year ago.

Me, being very carefull only to touch my peripherals and the actual computers only with gloves.

Also me, subtly touching any corporate owned computerd i encounter.

Speak for yourself. I wanna get paid to solve puzzles.

I got banned from saying not all that is called ai is bad by giving video game npcs from the last decades as an example.

I thought it was just llms that they where against but nope. I imagine Alan Turing spinning in his grave.

They are going to do this how?

If such backdoor exists then nothing stops criminals from using these same systems.

This smells like a win for organised crime. They only need the right officer on their payroll to get information on what tool/hack is going to be used.

Does the signal bot need its own phone number?

All of it is strings of ones and zeros that are instructions that tell my computer what to display.

Its basic freedom of speech. Imagine not beign able to give instructions in other contexts because you didn’t pay to use the words.

Oh i fully agree, thats definitely important content irl.

But thats not how i read this law, sounds like even found consuming at home it would count.

Its also specifically the contrast. Maximum 5y yail or maximum 10K fine. Therefor 1y jailed is worth $2K

Sounds a lot like the rich can do what they want and the poor get long turn punishment. Not much different then today actually.

Till at some point in time the value of freedom was estimated to be $2000 a year.

I dislike how normalized consumption poison still is but spending 5 years for the crime of putting something unhealthy inside your own body is insane.

The actual fuck? I didn’t know this, how is that even legal…

You don’t need to run macos on that older machine.

I distinctly remember how at some point the “best all around laptop for running windows” was a MacBook pro,

Ofc by now more people are catching on they are much bettered served with linux…

Don’t let this discourage you.

You can self host on your local network just fine and never portforward which is what exposes it to the outside.

I don’t need to watch tv or upload pictures to my server outside of my home. Its perfectly useable.

When you are ready and feel more confident you can setup your own wireguard vpn and only expose that.

Then Your device can connected to that vpn tunnels inside and can acces everything like home.

Currently without vpn your device is at risk every time it connects to a network you don’t own. A third party vpn is not a guarantee your data is safe either. Your home vpn though means all your outside the home networking is fully encrypted and outsiders cant even detect your home adresses is running a vpn to hack. (No ping unless you have the key)

I feel that is moving the goal post a bit but i am a history nerd so i will happily read about any historical examples of what you speak. (Not sarcasm i really really love learning and being proven wrong)

Here is what Wikipedia had to say about the orgins of copyright law (tldr its censorship by church and state)

There is an earlier story about a dispute of a copied work which ended in a battle its said to have caused 3000 casualties, an unreliable number but enough to assume this wasn’t exactly David vs Goliat either.

You must be joking, the vast majority of patents are owned by large corporations.

Can you give me one example of where copyright is protecting an average wealth citizen?

Enforcing copyright requires you to have the economic resources to create lawsuits when it gets infringed. Sometimes enforcing your rights can costs into millions of dollars. Infringers often have the resources to delay the legal case till you the rightsholder have no more money left to continue.

Places like china don’t care about it either and they will just copy and sell on the western market anyway.

Some sources for the later

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYHIJtQxbzw

https://qz.com/771727/chinas-factories-in-shenzhen-can-copy-products-at-breakneck-speed-and-its-time-for-the-rest-of-the-world-to-get-over-it

It would be way less of a problem for sure, but not moot. An individual inventor can still stop other people from using an identical solution simply for being first to file the paperwork.