[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Build Spyblock from uBlock Origin
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Build Spyblock from uBlock Origin
Tue, 4 Oct 2016 03:33:12 +0200
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.8.0
It's under GPLv3 if there is a problem with it can be forked
>an unknown group of people that seem to desperately want those addons
>installed on every single browser everywhere
And what the problem ?
Maybe because it's actually a better alternative to any other solution.
I participate myself to installing the addon on browsers.
>the fact that they are pushing those so incredibly hard makes me
>instantly reject them forever
You aren't making any sense do you read or understand what you right ?
"ho my ! the internet is heavily used by people so I wont use it"
This is what I interpret from you.
>if GNU icecat ever gets ublock or umatrix, I will personally abandon
>GNU icecat because I will no longer trust it.
It's free software fork it if you are not happy or compile it without
>spyblock is great, does one job, and does it good.
no it cannot block some content because adblock plus is designed to be a
addlbock and not more that.
Listen, if it becomes like adblock plus, someone else will make another
free software, just like when adblock edge was a thing, then µblock
screwed up and µblock origin who will carry the torch etc...
It's an endless cycle.
But please in the future make constructed posts this is not a chan board
try to not shitpost.
Le 04/10/2016 03:17, address@hidden a écrit :
> "µblock origin is really a good extension I personally use it icecat.
> We could go further with umatrix but people are too much disturbed by it."
> ublock and umatrix as well as other similarly named addons were (and continue
> to be) heavily shilled by an unknown group of people that seem to desperately
> want those addons installed on every single browser everywhere. the fact that
> they are pushing those so incredibly hard makes me instantly reject them
> forever. if GNU icecat ever gets ublock or umatrix, I will personally abandon
> GNU icecat because I will no longer trust it. spyblock is great, does one
> job, and does it good.
> Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox today!
> 26. Sep 2016 19:28 by address@hidden:
>> Icecat is already limited by the number of volunteers, I would like to
>> volunteer but my capacities are I think to limited to help on a
>> technical level for now (if someone has spare time to teach me I have no
>> problem with learning).
>> Reusing software that works especially if they are under GPL is I think
>> not a problem.
>> Users have always the freedom to deactivate them and put something else,
>> contrarily to the "eme" and other bad software that mozilla integrated.
>> µblock origin is really a good extension I personally use it icecat.
>> We could go further with umatrix but people are too much disturbed by it.
>> A functionality that would be interesting is when icecat opens for the
>> first time, a new window could propose to activate the addons in the
>> browser with a small explication of what it does.
>> Le 23/09/2016 19:51, Ivan Zaigralin a écrit :
>>> Please do not take this as anything but constructive criticism. I fully
>>> understand how limited the
>>> resources are, and I firmly believe that even in the present state icecat &
>>> most of the bundled
>>> features are incredibly useful and effective. I am merely trying to point
>>> out some directions for
>>> future development, once the resources are plentiful :)
>>> I believe icecat should do something more drastic than simply switch the
>>> adblocker. Something
>>> needs to change in the way features are added. It was a technical mistake
>>> to put core
>>> functionality into an existing adblocker, just as it is far from ideal to
>>> bundle https everywhere.
>>> This practice robs users of their freedom to choose addons, and it breaks
>>> icecat when it is
>>> repackaged for inclusion into a distribution (maintainers have to choose
>>> between locking users
>>> into a specific addon combination, or stripping addons, with both options
>>> clearly bad).
>>> One cromulent way to include functionality is by producing own in-house
>>> addons, like LibreJS,
>>> which minimize the interference with other addons by narrowing their
>>> function and keeping a
>>> separate namespace.
>>> Instead of writing features into an adblocker or httpser, these features
>>> need to be decoupled, so
>>> that users are free choose among dozens of functional equivalents, without
>>> sacrificing the extra
>>> privacy provided by gnuzilla code.
>>> On Friday, September 23, 2016 09:48:36 Sedov Andrey wrote:
>>>> Adblock Plus began to distribute advertising (Acceptable Ads Platform
>>>> <>>> https://AcceptableAds.com/Platform>>> >) = Adblock Plus died. uBlock
>>>> is the only solution.
>>>> 23.09.2016 08:56, David Hedlund пишет:
>>>>> I think it is time to build Spyblock from Adblock Plus (ABP) to uBlock
>>>>> Origin (uBO).
>>>>> Adblock Plus is as usually the most popular add-on on
>>>>> addons.mozilla.org but have grow less popular over time, while uBlock
>>>>> Origin is currently the 6th most popular add-on on addons.mozilla.org
>>>>> and have grow more popular over time. uBlock Origin one of the fastest
>>>>> trending add-on I've seen.
>>>>> uBO has dozens of features that's missing in ABP. For example uBO can
>>>>> block popunders that ABP cannot.
>> Note: veuillez s'il vous plaît utiliser GnuPg pour nos futures conversations
>> Plus d'info ici:
>> Message envoyé avec GNU Icedove un fork de Thunderbird
Note: veuillez s'il vous plaît utiliser GnuPg pour nos futures conversations
Plus d'info ici:
Message envoyé avec GNU Icedove un fork de Thunderbird
Description: OpenPGP digital signature