logoalt Hacker News

judge2020yesterday at 11:22 PM6 repliesview on HN

Yeah I don’t seem to feel any performance or functionality degradation myself. What <X> ad blocking related feature has been made impossible with MV3?


Replies

zamadatixyesterday at 11:49 PM

https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as... has a few of the more practical concrete examples. Namely content can load without the blocker being ready to filter, CNAME cloaking can't be handled properly (in Chrom* at least), and the filter rules aren't as flexible.

Interestingly, the rule count limits themselves do not (currently) seem to be much an issue despite it being one of the more common concerns on the original MV3 announcement.

show 1 reply
vamsipktoday at 12:49 AM

Maybe or maybe not. But Youtube ads are now freely flowing through with MV3. That was the entire ruse.

show 1 reply
tyingqtoday at 12:10 AM

The companies that don't want you using the lite version are waiting for full version to completely go away before blocking the lite one. No sense driving you to that. So, check back in a couple months and see if it's all still good.

HaloZeroyesterday at 11:50 PM

I've seen some ads slip through the cracks nowadays, like I think Wikia ads for some TV shows I go to now have ads on them. They gave up on blocking Meta.

novafuncyesterday at 11:28 PM

I believe the main things are that block lists have to be updated through the Chrome Web Store and there is an upper limit for things that can be blocked.

dartharvatoday at 4:04 AM

Severe limits on additional filters, which is bad for people who want it to add more annoyances than it does by default.