• kbal
    link
    fedilink
    413 hours ago

    The discourse about Mozilla is ridiculous, here and most everywhere. You’ve got people taking every perceived opportunity to attack them for things they do, things they didn’t do, and things it’s imagined they might’ve done. And then another crowd of equally determined people doggedly defending them for every idiotic blunder they make, such as this one.

    Meanwhile Mozilla itself has nothing substantial to say. This is not the first time a prominent extension has mysteriously gone missing from amo with Mozilla telling us nothing about its role in the incident. @[email protected] needs to be in the discussion giving us a real explanation of what happened, why they got it wrong, and what they’re doing to improve things.

    • setVeryLoud(true);
      link
      fedilink
      82 hours ago

      Correct, this two-sided discourse is due to a massive lack of communication on Mozilla’s part, leaving room for speculation.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        15 minutes ago

        The best I can think of is that the explainer language used to justify the extension’s removal was just boilerplate language that got copy+pasted here because someone clicked the wrong button. But even that makes a mockery of the review process.

        I think “oops clicked wrong button” would be slightly more defensible, but not by much. If they truly rejected the extension for content in it that it does not have, it’s hard to see how a human could make that mistake even accidentally. But maybe there’s something I’m missing.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    9
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    There’s a dozen Firefox extensions that really matter, at any given time. Mozilla has never appeared to give a particular shit about any of them. Paying special attention based on popularity wouldn’t be ideal, but for fuck’s sake, their passive-aggressive treatment keeps burning out the developers who fuel their ecosystem, and it would take vanishingly little effort to shield their keystone plugins.

    If their active neglect had ruined both uBlock and DownThemAll - I’m not sure I’d be using Firefox anymore, and I’ve been using Firefox since before it was called Firefox. Why the fuck would anyone normal even consider it?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      226 minutes ago

      DownThemAll is one of those extensions which get installed immediately for me. If I didn’t have DownThemAll and uBlock origin, I’d might as well just use edge smh

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        120 minutes ago

        And the author spent a year hassling Mozilla about how killing XUL plugins would make his wildly popular plugin nearly impossible. Did they move one iota to help that? Nope. Did they adopt DTA functionality natively, like they’d absorbed Pocket? Did they fuck. Their mantra for two straight decades has been “just rewrite!” and they cannot imagine why kept hemorrhaging devs and plugins and users once Chrome slimed its way into everyone’s options.

  • slazer2au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    535 hours ago

    Oh so ublock origin lite. A manifest V3 compatible adblocker for chromium browsers.
    The original ublock origin is unaffected

  • IHave69XiBucks
    link
    fedilink
    38
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    That poor dev is just getting so much shit thrown their way constantly having a short temper about it makes sense. They are fighting against an entire industry to make the internet usable for people. I hope everyone who has the means to donates to support the developer

    Edit: donate to block list maintainers thanks to lemmyvore below for the correction

    • lemmyvore
      link
      fedilink
      English
      234 hours ago

      The dev has not made available any means to donate to him directly. He asks that people donate to the maintainers of the block lists instead.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    Deutsch
    569 hours ago

    Probably due to automatic extension reviews by Mozilla.

    Sad that it happened, but at least it doesn’t impact the actual uBlock, only the lite version for which I honestly see no purpose in Firefox anyways.

    • Virkkunen
      link
      fedilink
      629 hours ago

      It was a manual review conducted by an actual person that in the end admitted they were wrong

    • @0x0
      link
      107 hours ago

      I honestly see no purpose in

      It’s to circumvent ManifestV3.

      • Obinice
        link
        fedilink
        66 hours ago

        I thought that was the shit Chrome was doing to block adblockers and antimalware plugins, if Firefox is doing the same thing what browser do we use now? :-(

        I don’t care about all the browser wars stuff, I lost interest when it was Netscape Vs IE, I just want a browser that I can configure fully myself and have it be as safe and secure as one can make it, within reason.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 minute ago

          I thought that was the shit Chrome was doing to block adblockers and antimalware plugins, if Firefox is doing the same thing what browser do we use now? :-(

          They’re doing a modified version of V3 that they changed to restore ad-blocking functionality.

    • Aatube
      link
      fedilink
      14 hours ago

      Theoretically, the browser executes the Mv3 blocking rules, so it could be optimized and more efficient than js ever could.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -308 hours ago

    It’s probably a coincidence that shortly after Mozilla acquires an ad company, they “accidentally” remove an ad blocker.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      558 hours ago

      They made an error and quickly corrected. It’s the addon author who threw a fit and removed the addon.

      This just makes me worried to rely on uBO but more because what if the author just fucks off because someone else pissed them off.

      • Übercomplicated
        link
        fedilink
        42 hours ago

        Lite is barely relevant for Firefox anyway. Gorhill (along with host list maintainers) is one of the saints of modern day open source; if he felt overwhelmed by Mozilla’s actions, and chose to just take Lite down from the extension store, he has every right to. No one should shit on someone who has given so much to the community.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        15
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        I know looking at it from the outside can look like throwing a fit, but as a software dev I can assure you our professional life is a constellation of papercuts and stumbling blocks on the best days. It is a fun job in many ways but it’s by its nature extremely frustrating at times. For professionals, the inherent frustrations are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, the rest of the iceberg being induced frustrations due to work environment causes of various nature, and a lot of devs who also develop stuff in their own free time do it to regain a sense of purpose and control.

        If these kinda hiccups keep happening even outside the day job of a developer, it is absolutely understandable that the reaction is simply to cut the bullshit rather than grabbing yet another shovel to shovel away the shit you’ve been covered with this time.

        Ultimately, the cost benefit analysis for keeping uBOL hosted on mozilla’s platform became skewed on the cost side and the additional expense is not one that gorhill can or wants to afford.

        So, yeah, it’s not a hissy fit.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        17
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        This just makes me worried to rely on uBO but more because what if the author just fucks off because someone else pissed them off.

        That is very concerning to me, also.

        Large parts of the internet relying on one or two tiny one-man FOSS projects? (UBO and ADguard are often cited as the only two reliable-ish and safe adblockers)

        If he can’t be bothered with that nonsense, how secure is UBO’s future? How secure is the future of adblocking?

        I would bet that advertising companies are rubbing their hands now and planning to ramp up pressure against these poor devs.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        378 hours ago

        It would seem that the ubo lite version was made specifically to cater to chrome and manifest v3 if I’m not mistaken…

        In the end the author may have just felt it was too much energy keeping a pared down chrome version on Firefox when the full version is present and working. Especially after this particular drama.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          118 hours ago

          Some say the Lite one was good for mobile since it was lighter weight but I didn’t notice a difference tbh.

          • Übercomplicated
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            Performance wise they should be identical, what matters is how many lists you have enabled, etc. If anything, performance-focused list management will result in more performance with ordinary uBO. Either way, gothill is a legend

            Edit: I’m wrong, apparently Lite can be faster on android after all

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                11 hour ago

                Nothingers! Do we get a secret handshake? A mid range phone, that doesnt feel like a mid range phone. My previous phone was Oneplus 6. Nothing 2a feels like how Oneplus 6 felt right at the beginning, at 30% lower a price. I’m loving the face down light only notifications, and the gesture navigation. Gestures means i can use my one thumb to scroll back and forth easily.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Mozilla can’t be trusted to host the addon, so the author is taking on the responsibility of hosting it himself. How is that his fault and not Mozilla’s?

        Whether Mozilla acted out of malice or incompetence is irrelevant. The report was false and the findings were incorrect, they have to be held responsible either way.

        • PonyOfWar
          link
          fedilink
          30
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          I’d much rather have them be overzealous and mistakenly block an addon for a few hours, than have them be too lax and approve addons actually stealing data.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            34 hours ago

            They also removed all previous versions except a very old one with known issues, thus exposing people to more danger than necessary in any way.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          238 hours ago

          Mozilla did apologize, said they were wrong and said they’d correct the issue. The author refused and decided not to put it back to AMO. At that points its on the author that it’s not AMO.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -19
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Promises from a for-profit company don’t mean shit. How many times have you seen the “we’ve heard you and we’ll do better next time” routine, only for next time to be the same or worse? They’d promise you the pissing Sun if it meant more dollar signs.

            They’re empty words. No company will put out a statement saying “we fucked up, we’re sorry, it’s going to happen again”. Until Mozilla can prove through actions that the issue is fixed, Hill is correct in distrusting them.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              30
              edit-2
              7 hours ago

              This is such a storm in a teacup. Someone making the manual checks at Mozilla fucked up and the situation was quickly admitted. I don’t know what else to wish, other than that the failure wouldn’t have happened in the first place. Sucks that it did. Now what sucks is that gorhill doesn’t want to do put it back but it is what it is, luckily it was just the Lite version.

              While I like a juicy conspiracy and fuck the sytsems and all, I don’t think they were lying when they said that they’d put the addon back if gorhill just resubmitted it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        As the article says, only when it blew up. But you’re right, the author doesn’t look good either.

        More honestly, I enjoy a good conspiracy theory with my coffee.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          58 hours ago

          As the article says, only when it blew up.

          The article also seems to say that he didn’t bother to disprove the mistaken findings and so Mozilla might’ve not even heard anything back until it blew up. The whole thing seems to have happened pretty quickly.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            05 hours ago

            Yeah, I know. If I was in a sensible mood this AM, I probably wouldn’t have started this chain. But if you look back to my first comment, I did say it was probably a coincidence.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        28 hours ago

        I think they had reasons to act how they acted. They’re probably on a lot of pressure because the whole tech world is fighting ad blocking now.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          18 hours ago

          There’s always some reason. I’m just worried that something happens with uBO and same happens there

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            25 hours ago

            Things always change in the world. Case in point being Lemmy and Federation. Whatever comes after uBO will never be like the same old thing, but we just keep on going forward and fondly remember the nice things we used to have, thanking those that worked tirelessly so we could enjoy those nice things.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              14 hours ago

              This is a peaceful but not the best approach. Though we should always respect and thank the developers, we (if possible) shouldn’t just let things be replaced with worse alternatives all the time.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                11 hour ago

                God grant me the serenity

                To accept the things I cannot change;

                Courage to change the things I can;

                And wisdom to know the difference.