This is hands down the best adblocker addon available. Post any

Adguard

im gonna turn off my computer and spend the day with the window open just looking outside

File: deathstar.jpg (216KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 900x900px

>>62211150
AdNauseam is actually faster, not to mention a better approach.

uMatrix is ublock + noscript, so its technically better.

>>62211150
it'd be nice if the rules definitions were described a little better. i want to block one particular site that gets referred to from sankaku every so often, and i can't see how to get ublock to do it.

>>62211160
faggot

>>62211160
See you in an hour

File: UPS-truck.jpg (52KB, 610x335px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 610x335px

>>62211160
*blocks your path*

>last update
>try to open any random pic from a direct link and can't
>deactivate ublock origin
>they work again
Nice app nerd

>>62211150
You're right op
we can't

>>62211167
>downloading all ads and faking clicks
>faster than blocking them
The absolute current state of /g/.

>>62211186
>thinks blocking is just blocking
>thinks not blocking is not faster

>>62211213
>using websitstensions

the "legacy" addon actually processed the html file before being parsed by firefox, so yes, if preprocessed before rendered, it IS an order of a magnitude faster than just parsing everything and its intricate web of cross-domain bullshit.

by comparison adnausia does shit AFTER the page has finished as well as the preprocessing part, which is worse than no blocker at all.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Who-cares-about-efficiency,-I-have-8-GB-and%7Cor-a-quad-core-CPU

stay fucking retarded, goy

File: 1485365143948.jpg (53KB, 595x720px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 595x720px

>>62211213
>>thinks not blocking is not faster
What the actual fuck?

>>62211150
>Protip: You can't.

Back to /b/ you go, newkiddo

File: unnamed.png (49KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 300x300px

>>62211150
no, ublock origin is bad cuz it still downloads the ads and then hides them. use a proper adblocker like Adblock Plus, it doesnt even let ads to download, saves you bandwidth, browsing will be faster. your welcome my friend

The latest version is not compatible with PaleMoon anymore so I switched to AdBlock Latitude

doesn't block twitch ads. it sucks

>>62212444
Is there anything that can do shit about HTML5 realistically?

>uBlock
>uMatrix
gorhill. What a fucking legend

>>62212134
i don't care if it downloads the ads. i do care when a site pops up and says "you seem to be using an adblocker because you didn't download any of the ads!"

if they want to believe that a banner with a stolen porn image that claims "hot single milfs in your area" is going to get clicks, then the hell with them.

File: wat_bull.jpg (33KB, 460x460px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 460x460px

>>62212134
>use a proper adblocker like Adblock Plus

> lets advertisers pay to be whitelisted
> claims to block ads
> only blocks some ads

proper?

>>62211150
I haven't had a single cheeky website "politely" forcing me to not use an ad blocker whilst I browse their propaganda and/or stolen information and/or malware thanks to uBlock Origin, thanks uBlock Origin!

>>62211150
It is.

>>62211167
Fuck off shill.

>>62212134
You fucking idiot. ABP is 10x worse performing than uBlock. It literally breaks your browser if you block over 100 thousand custom domains while uBO works fine.

>>62212444
Yes it does. At least I haven't seen a single ad there.

>>62212780
>if you block over 100 thousand custom domains

What kind of illegal shit are you into anon?

>>62212791
>blocking ads and tracking
>illegal shit
I'm just proving that ABP has terrible performance. If I was doing something illegal I'd use Tor/freenet/i2p.

I'm with the anons that say ublock origin started showing some ads even on youtube like sports betting ads. Anyone got a clue why it's happening?

>>62211150
Why is the privacy section grayed out in the lastest version on esr.

>>62211167
>AdNauseam is actually faster
How so? It actually makes more requests and is based on ublock origin.

>>62212134
>it still downloads the ads and then hides them
False.

>it doesnt even let ads to download
It does by default, not to mention that it has a build-in unremovable allowed ads list.

>>62212907
It is faster to send a packet than injecting html.

>>62212930
1: it is not, it never was
2: it changes the DOM anyway (there is no "injecting html" in either addons)

>>62212823
Your filter lists aren't up to date or your extension got borked by the new update to webext. There are quite a few problems he's been having with the webext transition on his github page. If I use the webext version of ublock origin my filter lists won't update and it gives me a message saying something along the lines of a network request error has prevented this from updating. I'm having to stick to ublock origin 1.13.8 until I find out what's causing it.

>>62211150
A D N A U S E U M

>>62212134
>spewing bullshit and being this stupid
>being this much of an oldfag

>>62213273
I got this problem too, creating a new profile fixed updating filters, but I still got some ads on YouTube, but not anywhere else.

the entire reason i started using adblockers back in 2008 was to save bandwidth. even though i have a 100mbps connection now i'm not going to stop blocking because ads look stupid, and tracking is unethical

>>62211150
depends on the browser.

safari with an actual content blocking api gives you superior adblockers
next is legacy firefox extensions.
then firefox new webextensions, for which Mozilla made sure that adblockers can't block Mozilla's Google Analytics:
https://github.com/mozilla/addons-frontend/issues/2785#issuecomment-314807534
last comes chrome, which is even more hostile:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBO-Extra/blob/master/README.md

>>62211150
I can't because it is.
But is it worth getting uMatrix? I'm already blocking all third party scripts and frames through uBlock Origin, what can I do with uMatrix that I can't with uBO?

Is there an adblocker that lets me whitelist certain youtube channels? I want to support some good hombres I watch.

>>62211167
>>62213754
That's an Adhider, not an Adblocker though.

I've been having an issue with uBlock lately where while I have it installed in firefox I can't view direct image links (eg. /xxxxxx.png), but I can view the images on the website themself. Anyone had a similar problem?

>>62214436
>I want to support some good hombres I watch.
how would displaying ads support them?
if you don't click the ads, there's no difference. they still get paid by views.

>>62214436
There aren't any good ones. Use uBlock Origin, donate to your YouTube chanels. They only lose 1$ per 100-1000 videos you watch (depending on the type of ads they show), so give them 2-5 bucks each and you'll be fine for a couple of years.

>>62214483
They get paid by ad views, not by views.

>>62214324
>then firefox new webextensions, for which Mozilla made sure that adblockers can't block Mozilla's Google Analytics:
Block it it in the hosts file

>>62214324
Show me an ad that uBlock Origin on firefox can't block. I have yet to see any on Nightly.

File: 1503572291481.jpg (132KB, 480x539px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 480x539px

>>62211160
Make a timelapse.

>>62214478
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/tag/1.14.5rc0
>There are many reports of people experiencing issues with some web sites, or images not loading, etc. Turns out many of these are a result of using some legacy extensions along uBO/webext. For instance, Reek's AAK in GreaseMonkey has been causing issues with images not loading.
>If you experience such issue, you will have to disable all your legacy extensions and see if this fixes your issue. If so, then you will have to re-enable your legacy extension one by one to find the one(s) causing the problem.
>Everything is moving to WebExtensions, so it might be just a good time to start giving up on legacy extensions, they are not going to be supported at all in a couple of weeks when Firefox 57 is released.
>Another option is to install uBO 1.13.8 and disable auto-update for it.

>>62211150
NoScript. That said, I use UBO as a backup.

>>62214736
ublock will always be inferior to abp:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Cosmetic-filtering-in-%C2%B5Block:-version-0.4.0.0-update

>>62212349
Works in Waterfox.

>>62211981
>https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Who-cares-about-efficiency,-I-have-8-GB-and%7Cor-a-quad-core-CPU
but that's from 2015.

there's also this from 2015:
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Myth:-uBlock-consumes-over-80MB
just checked in chrome's task manager and it's at 200MB.

so something became very bloated.

>>62212460
man I really wanna use uMatrix but I can't be bothered to unblock things all the time because almost everything breaks

>>62211181
>try to open any random pic from a direct link and can't
Try disabling greasemonkey or "save file to" instead of ublock and see if it works.

>>62211168
lies.
umatrix is the dynamic filtering from ublock.
https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dynamic-filtering:-default-deny
so ublock can do what umatrix does, but additionally fallback to static filtering.

>>62214938
>50x better performance
>inferior
How retarded are you?

>>62215027
[1] In latest release of Chromium (40+) I have notice that the garbage collector can be rather "lazy", i.e. meaning sometimes it takes a while before freed memory is garbage collected. It's why that when surveying memory usage it is important to force a garbage collection cycle using the dev console of the extension itself.

>>62212072
>not having the easylist in hosts file and arguing like a dumbass cuck
wew

>>62216185
what exactly are adb-style rules going to do in the hosts file?

>>62211150
Adnauseum

>>62216746
https://www.google.com/search?q=easylist+for+hosts+file

>>62213273
>>62213999
>go to your add-ons
>disable ublock
>close browser
>open browser
>enable ublock
>close browser
>open browser
>update lists

That's how I got it fixed