Google update could 'destroy' ad-blocking

Sega Dreamcast

party like it's 1999
May 6, 2009
46,205
5,869
Charlotte
Imagine using the internet at all when libraries exist. ****ing uneducated poor morons.

Imagine reading books, when you could read these:

6dNSLHe.jpg
 

PositiveCashFlow

Snowmen fall to earth unassembled
Jul 10, 2007
5,704
2,476
Imagine Liderally Karing Wat Happen`s On the On-line Wen U Could Literally Jus`t B Pumpin`g Iron `n` Iruman Literally in the Jim, Or U Could Literally Go Out`Side `n` Collectin`g the SunLite `n` Literally Gettin`g Tanner `n` Tanner `n` Vitamin D Ray`s, Rather Than Werrying About What Happen`s On-Line.

It's -20 outside right now
 

Legionnaire

Help On The Way
Jul 10, 2002
44,254
3,965
LA-LA Land
Opera was brought by a Chinese company. Use it at your own peril.

And yes, I'm aware of the irony of an Asian making this statement.

Nothing ironic. Plenty of Asian nations distrust or fear the Chinese. Besides aren't you an American citizen? China definitely doesn't have the United States best interest at heart and they use Chinese business to carry it out at times.
 

Jiminy Cricket

#TeamMeat
Mar 9, 2014
2,168
2,107
What Ever Happen`d 2 America On-Line Anyway?

What Ever Happen`d 2 America On-Line Anyway? Back in My Day, We had AnMerica On-Line, `n` We Use`d it 2 Connec`t 2 the NeterNet. It Weren`t the Fastes`t, but it Worked. Nowaday`s U Have all these Fancy Gizmo`s `n` Gadget`s, `n` I Don`t know Wat the `Fuss` is all About. I Say, Bring Back America On-Line. :clap::clap::clap:
 
Last edited:
Sep 19, 2008
372,075
23,936
What Ever Happen`d 2 America On-Line Anyway?

What Ever Happen`d 2 America On-Line Anyway? Back in My Day, We had AnMerica On-Line, `n` We Use`d it 2 Connec`t 2 the NeterNet. It Weren`t the Fastes`t, but it Worked. Nowaday`s U Have all these Fancy Gizmo`s `n` Gadget`s, `n` I Don`t know Wat the `Fuss` is all About. I Say, Bring Back America On-Line. :clap::clap::clap:

I agree with this comment
 
Sep 19, 2008
372,075
23,936
Am listening to a tech podcast right now and they brought up the whole Chromium blocking ads crisis and how Mozilla was potentially contradicting themselves

411: It's Not Butt by Back to Work - Stream At PodParadise.com

DISCUSSED: Dan's fighting his computer and explores font corruption; Merlin hates pebbles in his shoe; Dan has an anecdote about massages; Merlin has an anecdote about the FaceTime exploit; this leads to discussion about how big companies deal with huge-scale, unexpected problems; some thoughts on The Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect; the problem with journalism about stuff we actually know about; remembering Michael Crichton; Heartbeeps!; a clever way to reduce damage from careless delivery; is there a new Browser War underway?; and answering a question from Listener Stephen about life after Editorial.
 

Jiminy Cricket

#TeamMeat
Mar 9, 2014
2,168
2,107
Their idea is to depreciate the
Code:
webRequest
API and in its place deploy a new
Code:
declarativeNetRequest
API.

Basically, adblock/uorigin et al would use the
Code:
webRequest
API to intercept incoming traffic and block it before it ever had a chance to load in your browser. This is why some pages (especially ad heavy ones) will load slower when you have an adblocker enabled. While they're not removing the
Code:
webRequest
API, they are demoting it to "read-only", so there's not chance these adblockers can intervene and make the necessary changes anymore.

IIRC, the
Code:
declarativeNetRequest
API will allow for some modification (up to 30k requests I believe) which means that you'd get some functionality out of blockers, should they choose to update them to the correct calls. But, you'll hit 30k requests pretty quick and it won't do a lot for your overall experience. It's not a lot of room in aggregate.

This is all to speed up the browser and browsing experience, which is a noble effort. Frankly, as Google is the largest ad driver on the Internet (I think), I'm surprised they haven't tried to do something similar.

If Manifest V3 is adopted (none of this is set in stone yet), then it's probably time to look at alternatives. I'm not sure if this will affect Chromium, for instance (though I'm not up to speed on how that's built - I thought Chrome was built on the back of Chromium).

I've been testing out some firefox deployments since I heard of this a few weeks back, and frankly it's good, but it bends over my CPU. It can barely run on my macbook pro. It will routinely eat up 25-30% of my cpu headroom on my Ryzen 1700x, which is no small feat. I don't know what the **** they're doing in the background. Fiddler goes absolutely bananas when I'm using it.

Opera maybe? I'll have to do some research on Chromium.
Lmao all this Nerdy garbage `n` Literally nothing Happen`d, Literally a Entire essay about Nothing. :laugh: MeanWhile I`ve jus`t been Pumpin`g Iron in the Jim `n` Gettin`g Swole`r `n` Swole`r `n` Swole`r `n` Swole`r Ever`Day, While Nerd`s are Typin`g up Essay`s On`Line on there Overprice`d Mechanical Keybored`s.

The Internet Is For Nerd`s.
 

LarryFisherman

o̯̘̍͋̀͌̂͒͋͋ͯ̿ͯͦ̈́ͬ͒̚̚
May 9, 2013
6,374
2,658
Arvada, CO
Just want to update this thread after a few months and say that I'm seeing more CPU-heavy usage from Firefox, now in my Windows 2016 environment.

upload_2019-4-30_19-10-47.png


It was fluctuating between 25% and spiking to 60-ish% when selecting items. Only one tab, which Google Drive was open.

Not sure how anyone is using it whatsoever. It's OK on my Ubuntu machines. Everywhere else is terrible though.

This is *not* a post about HFBoards. This is an isolated *Firefox* issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roman Fell

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->