Technology

59534 readers

3196 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

132

UBO Lite Pulled from Firefox Store by developer (www.pcworld.com)

submitted 1 month ago by atrielienz@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"The uBlock Origin Lite add-on was also accused of collecting user data and running afoul of privacy concerns, which is one of the big reasons why people switch over to the Firefox browser in the first place. Hill [the developer] responded: “It takes only a few seconds for anyone who has even basic understanding of JavaScript to see the raised issues make no sense.”"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 92 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Why would anyone even want to use uBlock Origin Lite on Firefox? It's a stripped down version designed to work with the limitations of manifest V3 in chrome.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

iirc the dev claims its more useful for firefox mobile.

[–] airglow@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Any details on that? The full uBlock Origin works well on mobile and I don't see how a lite version with reduced blocking effectiveness could be more useful.

[–] madis@lemm.ee 36 points 1 month ago

uBOL is entirely declarative, meaning there is no need for a permanent uBOL process for the filtering to occur, and CSS/JS injection-based content filtering is performed reliably by the browser itself rather than by the extension. This means that uBOL itself does not consume CPU/memory resources while content blocking is ongoing -- uBOL's service worker process is required only when you interact with the popup panel or the option pages.

uBOL does not require broad "read/modify data" permission at install time, hence its limited capabilities out of the box compared to uBlock Origin or other content blockers requiring broad "read/modify data" permissions at install time.

Emphasis mine. No background processes, including a website-reading permission does indeed sound more optimized for mobile, where people may have limited resources.

[–] piracysails@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago

Apparently some users preffered it for Android.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

My guess is that it's used predominantly by people who own budget smart phones. Having lite versions of apps be available to people who don't use thousand dollar flagships I think is kind of important. However, I intended the post to be informational.

[–] Takumidesh@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is the lite version more performant?

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

On lower end smart phones? It probably just slows the phone down less specifically because of how few processes it uses in the background. But I don't know. I'm not a lite UBO user. It definitely doesn't have the same number of features as the regular variant of UBO though.