Recommended Posts

I mean on a site which offers some form of security review,

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock/

February 20, 2015

That extension been dead since someone mentioned it.

As I interpret it, the original dev gorhill got bogged down by issues, so he let someone take over and manage the issues reported.

His post: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/ublock-a-lean-and-fast-blocker.365273/page-35#post-2478233"'>

Why is it pointless?

 

I don't get it, gorhill was tired and gave main development to someone else.

it was a little more dramatic than that, but yeah its not pointless to use the addon because it is still alive.

 

Basically what happened was, out of the blue gorhill decided he wanted to transfer ownership of ublock. Shortly afterwards, the other most active developer Dethamns (he did most of the work porting ublock to firefox, looks like he predicted the impending drama and decided to peace out lol) quit the project, leaving chris (maintainer of the safari version) the only person to transfer it to. Chris accepted, and gorhill transferred ownership over to him. Gorhill then forked the project on github with issues disabled. Shortly afterwards gorhill was upset that chris was still using the name 'ublock', and asked him to change it (which doesn't make much sense, since gorhill had transferred the ownership of the main repo over to chris), in the end gorhill ended up renaming his "uBlock?".

 

Gorhill's actions didn't make a whole lot of sense, if he was just sick of dealing with help vampires in the issues section there could have been much more graceful ways of going about it, such as assigning someone else to handle the issues page etc... The out of the blue transfer of ownership and resulting two different ublock versions caused unnecessary drama and confusion.

 

ublock doesn't seem to be in any immediate danger though, gorhill is still maintaining his chrome version, and there is still one firefox developer contributing to chris's version (and right now both versions are basically identical)

Why is it pointless?

 

I don't get it, gorhill was tired and gave main development to someone else.

Blocking effectiveness has everything to do with the filters. Not the extension.

 

read the posts i gave in the mozillazine link

 

AFAIK, ublock is using ABP Filter System. not its own

Blocking effectiveness has everything to do with the filters. Not the extension.

 

read the posts i gave in the mozillazine link

 

AFAIK, ublock is using ABP Filter System. not its own

You need to read up more on ublock ;)

 

The reason ublock has become popular is not because of blocking effectiveness/filters (its been well known from the beginning that it uses APB filters/syntax), its because its performance and resource usage is significantly better than APB.

 

look at the benchmarks on the github page:

 

https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock

 

 

Adblock plus's element hiding works in an extremely inefficient way, it injects massive css stylesheets into every webpage, and for webpage with multiple iframes into every iframe, this results in very significant memory and cpu overhead, and these performance issues were the main reason for ublock's creation.

 

https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2014/05/14/adblock-pluss-effect-on-firefoxs-memory-usage/

  • Like 2

Speaking of uBlock, I fixed this issue:

 

Anyone get this issue with the menu?

 

I click the menu button, it renders it, but then it quickly disappears. When I click again, I don't get the full menu, just this:

 

firefoxmenubug.png

 

I just removed uBlock from the menu.

60FPS youtube stopped working on beta 38 for me. Anyone else have this problem?

Google disabled MSE playback on their end, because users were reporting issues with corrupt video in Firefox (Turns out, a lot of graphics cards have god awful drivers, and often refuse to decode video properly)

Should have tested before asking. Didn't do anything and 60fps videos working fine in latest Firefox 38 beta

http://i.imgur.com/NigDHas.png

Was there a new beta released? Mozilla and Google are co-operating on it so Google will flip it back on whenever Mozilla need it tested.

The main reason it was disabled in the first place was certain old Intel (And some AMD/Nvidia) drivers that broke video decoding, Mozilla recently blocked them so a new beta should have that block in place.

Took long enough, but Firefox is finally getting a HiDPI art pass on Windows.

FirefoxHiDPIUI2.png

There's still a bit to do, the dropdown menu still uses low resolution icons, same with the social button and the site security indicator, but it's still a nice improvement.

That's really odd, it's just doesn't work for me.

 

It should be "Beta" channel for you in below dialog to update smoothly from one Beta to another. If it isn't then you need to download Beta again from here - https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#beta

 

IW3wcvq.png

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • Dell, HP PCs ran into endless reboot, BitLocker recovery loops but Windows 11 isn't to blame by Sayan Sen Last month Neowin reported on a major issue on Dell systems wherein a bug in its official support tool was leading to endless blue screen of death (BSOD) and restarts. Following our report, Dell officially acknowledged its SupportAssist-related crash issue, confirming that the culprit is not Microsoft's operating system but rather a faulty version of its own remediation software. In a newly published support advisory, Dell stated that version 5.5.16.0 of Dell SupportAssist Remediation and Alienware SupportAssist Remediation can trigger blue screen errors and unexpected system restarts. The company notes that the problematic component operates independently of the main SupportAssist application, meaning users should not remove the primary SupportAssist software when troubleshooting the issue. According to Dell, the crashes are linked specifically to the SupportAssist Remediation service, which is bundled with SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools, and as such it has since released an updated version, 5.5.16.1, which is said to resolve the problem. Affected users are advised to first verify whether version 5.5.16.0 is installed by checking the Installed Apps section in Windows Settings. If so, Dell recommends updating SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools through either SupportAssist's "Update Software" feature or Dell Command Update. Dell also advises users to back up important data before performing the update and to ensure systems remain connected to power throughout the installation process. If you are still having issues though make sure to report to the Dell support forum. As it turns out though Dell is not the only PC maker currently dealing with update-related headaches as HP is also facing a separate but probably equally frustrating issue involving recent Windows Secure Boot updates that were released with recent Windows 11 Patch Tuesdays. Similar to Dell, HP also put up its own support article where it explains the issue. The company says that affected devices could hit a brick wall when booting as they run into a BitLocker recovery loop after the April 2026 updates. The problem appears to affect systems wherein the new UEFI Secure Boot CA 2023 certificates fail to apply properly. As such affected users will find themselves entering their recovery key over and over again despite the system otherwise functioning normally. HP says such PCs should be updated to the latest available BIOS version and configured with the necessary Secure Boot certificates before installing Microsoft's Windows 11 Patch Tuesday updates. Systems that are already experiencing the problem may require BIOS configuration changes to restore normal boot behavior. Admins can find information regarding that in the support article here on HP's official website.
    • Getting further away from the artistic study of mental disease that was the first game... (which never needed any sequels to begin with) But I get it, a company has to make money. And the second was at least visually impressive, if not in any other way.
    • If its the devs fault you would think Unreal would help M$ take full advantage of Unreal and work with them to fix the performance issues. Otherwise they are catching unwarranted bad press.
    • Thanks for the advice guys, I'll give my current GPU a clean and then run the benchmarks to see how similar it is. Hopefully a bit of a clean-out will help it last a bit longer.
    • Pretty sure those will still be in this game. The series' well-explored psychosis themes will return as well.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      246
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!