No more ublock + umatrix

install icecat

The only thing slow about firefox these days is the code that gets switched on when you use XDG_DESKTOP_PORTAL or use an android, and try to save images from 100 danbooru tabs.

Can anyone summarize what is happening?
The will block modifications?

fcking use bionus/grabber for this JESUS

okay the question is ??
how the fuck you force no-JS captcha on all sites ???????????
like what 4chanX captcha is ?????

They sure got butthurt real fast.

>they think the trannies at mozilla wont follow suit
Delusional

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-01-23 at 15.47.48.png (1920x1380, 369K)

Google is getting shittier by the day.

Oh well, I use Firefox so no need to worry about this shit.

Attached: ohno.gif (333x277, 2.82M)

Yea, it's not like Mozilla has a history of copying what ever Google does

Attached: file.png (650x305, 54K)

Time to switch to Edge

wont block entirely, but gimp blocking down to AdBlock Plus level

And severely limit script blocking in general

if ABP blocks YT ads fuck it that is good enough for me

Do they think anyone believes their reasoning for removing the ability to block webrequests is because of "speed"?

How long do you think it will keep doing that? Once they've gimped ublock and destroyed scriptblocking, do you really think they wont start forcing ads on youtube?

who the fuck cares you fucking idiot

If you enable Firefox resist and Container Tabs you don't even need any fucking content blockers. contrary content blockers make you easier trackable.

How New are you?

Just use tonvid or hooktube and drag drop the yt links into mpv.
You get a native player outside the browser without any ads or all the overhead.

I am surprised there are still people watching videos or images inside their browser like how low iq are you

Excellent, people will switch back to Firefox, because the people who don't use adblockers take their browser selection advice from those who do.

>just go through all these extra steps to get the exact same functionality you would get watching it in the browser
actually scratch that, diminished functionality because mpv's gui is somehow worse than youtube's

At least I hope (((webdevs))) will start supporting other browser than chrome eventually. Currently browsing with firefox feels like browsing with ie6 because nobody tests shit.

Hey retard, tell me how those features block malicious scripts or better yet, stop talking about things you don't understand

So let me recap dragging and dropping a link into a window is hard?

Literally it is easier and faster than through YouTube itself but hey brainlet stays brainlet

It will happen. Firefox's marketshare will go back up. As much as companies hate adblockers, they also need users. The marginal cost of a user browsing their site is less than what they lose in marketshare by kicking out adblock users. It's why nobody shares forbes articles anywhere anymore.

>block malicious scripts

You don't need to if your browser is sandboxed. But obvious brainlet is obvious. How is Windows 10? Let me guess you use Google Search and YouTube as well.

opening an extra window means extra clutter on my screen and is just another step i don't want to do when i'm watching youtube
clicking a link in youtube is pretty much instant, maybe if i had bad internet it wouldn't be but shit loads instantly for me

>I am a brainlet

So what if they actually do this and I don't want to use Firefox? What's the alternative?

So it is clutter to open an extra window which you can manipulate at will and even hide but it isn't clutter to let YouTube run 100000 scripts inside a browser window of which only one actually plays the video.

Congratulations you are really intelligent. How is life in India?

lol chromed!

>I don't want to use Firefox

Means you are using something based on Webkit/Blink currently meaning Google and countless other advertisers and trackers already have your browsing history.

>I want to suck Google's cock and give them all my private info

Newfags thinking that ungoogled chromium or brave protects them how dumb are you ignorant faggots? Fingerprinting and supercoojies have been a thing for more than a decade

>having two windows open instead of one is clutter?
yes
>hide it
if i'm watching videos it kind of needs to be open
>youtube scripts
i'm guessing most people here don't allow scripts globally and with however i currently have it set up (i haven't looked at it in over a year) it works just fine

Can't browse the internet without being tracked, I don't care about that, but I want to block scripts and elements.

No, it's ungoogled. It's going to be tougher to install ublock+umatrix

Yes, because no malware has ever escaped the sandbox. Holy fuck, you're completely ignorant. Also, blocking scripts servers other purposes beyond malware prevention
We know you are

So you want to view the video but say it is clutter having mpv open. That means you have the tab the video is playing in view. So the whole tab in plain view with YouTube's useless bloat is what you want to see instead of the video at 100% window size.

Also If you don't allow scripts you can't view YouTube you high iq. You allowed YouTube's ten thousand scripts and a full browser window fine but call a window.with just the video clutter. While being able to continue browsing and watching that video. That makes sense yes??

Why are so many newfags and brainlets on Jow Forums nowdays

im with this guy, yes i can get better performance using a dedicated media player (my gfx isnt hardware accelerated in chromium but is with vlc) but it just isnt worth it for watching youtube videos, plus going through hoops when they change things server side

>calls people newfags
>dat reddit spacing

Attached: 1539969286176.jpg (620x620, 233K)

so what to use instead of ublock?

You can easily browse the internet without being tracked. Firefox enable resistFP and containers there you go. Even Google.acknowledged officially that this is untrackable which is the reason why it makes modern captcha unsolvable since captcha is based on your browser entropy.

Surely Google has no reason to lie publicly and claim you can't be tracked...

yes no JS malware ever can escape a Unix sandbox. You are aware Firefox has no inherent sandbox on Unix anyway since it is plainly retarded. The chrome sandbox on Unix actually makes it less secure; read the long elaboration of the arch developers why they disable user namespaces.

If you use Windows then you should stick with Google Chrome, Discord and India

You're not as smart as you think you are.

having two windows rather than one open is clutter. if i fullscreen things then yeah it doesn't matter, but otherwise it's two windows instead of one; two is greater than one, i don't really get what you're not getting about this
as far as scripts, noscript and umatrix let you blacklist or whitelist by domain and i assume most people have one of those installed. letting youtube run first party scripts does not really bother me that much, no; my computer's not from 1998, so it doesn't have any problem running whatever first party scripts youtube runs
why do you care so much what other people use? why is everyone who disagrees with you a newfag brainlet?

I am with the mpv guy. There are no extra hoops. You just use an extension that calls mpv $markedLink (if you don't use vimium etc you are a brainlet anyway) and there you go.

Also been using this since years hadn't had it break once.

Yes they don't have any reason to lie if that functionality is built into their product that is sold commercially. Read how recaptcha works specifically recaptcha v3. They'd literally pay you a million dollars if you come up with a way to track resistFP.
How dumb people are is really beyond me.

does it load it in-frame? if it did that i'd probably switch to that. mpv's ui is still worse than youtube's but i can deal with that

I am more intelligent than you pajeet that's enough to me.

Who gives a shit about recaptcha. You're claiming you can't be tracked because Google said so and they definitely have a reason to lie about that. By the way, you're not dumb, just naive

what you mean by in frame? you have an addont that literally just executed the command "mpv '$highligtedLink'" I don't get what you mean.

And if you don't like mpv ui(I love it) you can literally use any player you want.. Just pipe youtube-dls stream into it.

he probably means does it load as a frame inside the browser itself, so no alt-tabbing (probably not else it would need an extension)

Ok so just to clarify for the whole thread you want to tell me a Firefox browser with resist enabled and Container Tabs is still trackavle yes?
Go please for the love of god and run a fingerprinting script on such a browser then come back embarrassed. And if you don't trust anyone go ficking develop your own fp script run it then come back embarrassed.

You clearly don't have a clue how web privacy works or what fingerprinting or supercookies are. Instead of calling others naive you should learn the topic you are talking about first.

Why would it need alt tabbing? as soon as it starts it gets focused and regardless who doesn't make their video players always on top like wtf? How do you guys watch "videos in the background" do you just listen to audio or what??
seriously what kind of brainlet question are these

How about you prove your statement? The burden of proof rests entirely on you since you made the claim. It's not my job to prove you wrong when you present no evidence that your statement is true. PS how does resist prevent your ISP from tracking you?

if the answer is no then just say that so i can go back to ignoring these discussions and watching videos on youtube normally

Not him.but there is a chance you might be dropped as a child.

Let's think there is a company developing a product for some kind of problem. Now different entities commercial, academia and governments says "we can't solve 10% (resistFP) of this problem" but still everyone is lying?

Are you from North Korea or a glow in the dark shill?

>loading an external application into the ui chrome if another while being too retarded to toggle an always on top rule for the video player
hello india chromosome 21 calling here

so the answer's no, got it

>Has working fingerprint protection
Firefox is easy to fingerprint cause of web-extensions bugs.

So let me recap it is too hard for you to once toggle a rule to make your video player stay on top? Please tell me how do you watch videos if you want to do something else at the same time?
Most logical.explanation is that your attention span is probably too low to do both.

Seriously seeing this thread made me lose faith in humanity. The last five years Jow Forums literally went backwards In terms of intellectual evolution

Always people throwing out shut like this but never providing any poc. I wonder why you glow in the dark fsggot.

it's not about it staying on top, i want the video to be part of the webpage
if it can't do that then i don't care what it else it can do, it's not a solution i'm interested in
>but brainlet or whatever
i really don't care what you think about it, i like what i like and if it can't do that, i have no interest in using it, bye

That depends, other browsers can convert the api into a patch to put on the newer chrom* versions so they can retain the old api.

>I don't want my view to be cluttered
>I want the video inside the browser so most of.my screen space is wasted

intellectuals at their work

This one for the UUID (unique per user cause some brainlet dev decided to randomized extensions id and make it just once)
bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1405971

And for a proof of concept about leaking extra data just make a mutation observer target document, you'll see any panels etc that any addon need to show to the users as now they're in the same context as the webs instead of isolated.

Even ublock when you have to show the element picker is leaking stuff, in some cases the leakage permits the webs use of the web-extension apis so they can leak your whole history.

This is not a Firefox bug but a Webext bug and as thus applies to Chrome as well. This is called a side channel attack and theoretically existed since day one of extensions.

Though this only confirms my previous thesis:
You are completely anonymous only if you enable resist, container and have no add-ons installed (i.e. you specifically allow all trackers and ads to load since your fingerprint is non unique)

>The current webRequest API allows extensions to intercept network requests in order to modify, redirect, or block them.
>Chrome needs to wait for the result from the extension in order to continue processing the request.

>The new declarativeNetRequest API [..] is more performant and offers better privacy guarantees to users.

Do they even read this garbage after they write it?

Attached: 1547801552424.jpg (500x500, 72K)

>This is not a Firefox bug but a Webext bug

READ MY FIRST COMMENT YOU RETARD:
>Firefox is easy to fingerprint cause of web-extensions bugs.

Where in that phrase i have stated that this is not a web-extension bug?

And firefox decided to have this cause we asked them for a place to run the code isolated form the webs and they ignored the request, so it was possible not to leak using xul extensions but now it's not always possible and depends on the use case.

>enable resist, container and have no add-ons installed
Now your browser is crap.

They should have made a better api instead of rushing out this half assed shit cause as soon as you have an extension installed you're fucked.

PS. The uuid bug is not present on chrom*.

Do you have an issue with basic reading comprehension? Maybe it's related to your horrible English? And i say this as a non-native speaker. Your post is barely legible. You may want to fix that before making posts about other people's intelligence
As for what i could actually understand from your post - No one is talking about recapcha. I'm talking about Google having an interested in claiming something prevents tracking even if it doesn't. You know like how VPN providers claim you're anonymous when using their service?

Is this going to kill NoScript too?

20 rupees have been deposited into your Google Rewards™ account.

Not him but you prove you have no clue how privacy works in the internet. Go read some introductory papers then come back.

There's a play with mpv extension that works on a bunch of sites other than youtube, and mpv tools to make gifs or webms of clipped videos on the fly, zero latency for keyboard shortcuts, even to scroll rather than mash an arrow keys
I don't know how anyone can live any other way.
Do you even use a window manager?

>I have no argument so i'll just throw an insult instead
Yup, you sure seem intelligent senpai

In all chromium based browsers, yes

Ahahhaha this is the power of ""FREE"" software

Mommy noooo, where is my Netscape??? I really miss my Netscape!!!! Pllleeaasseeee mommyyy noooooooooooooo

Make your own browser.

Fuck them all to death.

G-Gorhill will save us, r-right?

As if people won't just fork... Delusional FFaggots.
ungoogled is unstoppable at this point.

Opera's built-in ad blocker will take care of this, right?

Let me get this straight
>"Your extension is deciding whether or not to allow a website to show you specific content"
>"We don't want the extension to do this, so give us the authority to decide whether or not you will see this content"

If that is the case, how is that not obviously showing their true colors? Also I bet their excuse will be that you can change these settings in the chrome settings tab, but then the option will mysteriously disappear within 6 months.

Attached: 1324021348566.jpg (500x276, 38K)

Ublock Origin.

who cares

Attached: 1474947819494.jpg (423x466, 26K)

I'm gonna take a wild guess that later on Google (and possibly MS, Netflix, ETC...) might want to "convince" ($$$) the W3C to make it so that the next iteration of EME requires the browser's engine to function this way, so that other browser companies would implement this too in fear of loosing their market share (if especially if sites like youtube start to require it).

Another thing that I worry about is if mainstream browsers go down the route of having their own crappy adblocks that could redirect competitor services ads with ones that the browser's parent company prefers which could lead to potential legal kerfuffles that could end up to what I mentioned with EME but with an additional "please don't sue me" measure.

Attached: king of the bill.jpg (480x360, 9K)

This, Chrome is the new IE. Rip browser market share

IIRC, ABP started leaking preroll ads on youtube a few years ago, along with some inbetween and it took people months to get it to work again. By that point, I had already made the jump to Origin because I could not get ABP to block everything. I'm convinced Google was paying them long before the whole Eyeo revelation.

Honestly i'm cutting chrome out of my life.