|
TemporalParadox posted:What extension is recommended these days to rip videos from sites like Youtube/dailymotion/whatever? But if you want to grab 1080 or higher stuff, the best thing is youtube-dl. It's a pretty techie solution but it works with DASH, and updates very quickly whenever Google changes anything to gently caress with us. My question is, with Youtube now going all HTML5 player, is there any way to force Chrome to use h.264 instead of Webm? Youtube delivers VP9 by default if the browser supports it, and it sucks. I watch LP videos and even the less demanding ones look worse, other things look like hot garbage.
|
#
¿
May 24, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 17:36 |
|
|
Jippa posted:I accidentally removed a ublock origin command that completely hid ignored users posts on SA while trying to fix some thing else. Does any one know what it was? somethingawful.com##.ignored.post
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
Malloc Voidstar posted:I mean, if anyone has the resources to maintain a patch set for that it's going to be Microsoft On the other hand... Microsoft sells ads too. And they just switched to chromium because they didn't want to spend the money to maintain their own browser engine anymore. They've already decided browser market share isn't worth fighting over. I don't see them taking a big pro-adblocking stand. A better hope for chrome-based browsers is Opera & Vivaldi. It sounds like the unlimited webrequest function will still be in the source, so it probably won't be difficult to keep turned on.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 10:28
|
|
|
Piholes aren't great, even compared to ABP filters let alone ublock. They only block based on domains, they generally don't block video ads, suck at filtering scripts, and they're a pain when you want to temporarily allow something. I have a similar thing installed on my router. It's nice for getting rid of most ads while using my phone, but I'd pretty unhappy if that was the only ad blocker available.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 04:45
|
|
|
Good news on the ad-blocking front from all the chromium-based altbrowsers. Vivaldi, Opera, and Brave are all planning to keep Manifest V3 active, and Vivaldi is talking about making a small extension store to support ublock. OTOH: quote:The only major browser maker who did not respond to our request for comment on this issue was Microsoft.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2019 14:05
|
|
|
zebez posted:How much does Vivaldi, Opera, and Brave differ from regular chrome? Cause I can't browse the web without ublock Origin anymore. They're all a bit less minimal than regular chrome. Opera & Vivaldi put bookmarks, downloads, and all the other miscellany on a sidebar. Vivaldi has the classic Speed Dial new tab page which IMO is pretty great. I use Vivaldi as a secondary browser (main firefox). I suppose the Opera if you hid the sidebar would be pretty chrome-like. They don't have the connection to the google-sphere that Chrome does, so if you like Chrome's sign-in & sync with google features that's a problem. Brave I would avoid since the guys behind it are into weird cryptocurrency -- they are literally trying to make the marble economy from a classic dumb SA thread -- that makes me not want their software anywhere on my PC, much less holding my browser history. At best they're idiot crypto-kooks and at worst they're scammers. Strong nope.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
Ublock Origin dev builds have been rejected by the Google Chrome webstore. https://www.ghacks.net/2019/10/12/the-end-of-ublock-origin-for-google-chrome/ https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/745 It's a weird rejection that may be a mistake / automated testing nonsense, but Gorhill the ublock guy is already so pissed at google that he's not even going to argue about it. We'll see what happens when the next mainline release is pushed.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
aas Bandit posted:I have a "Video Title Adder" extension that I've been using on Chrome forever that adds a title + thumbnail for any YouTube URL. Really handy for deciding if you felt like clicking a vid link or not. It's now failed, and the URL is dead (just 404s when I try to find it in the webstore) and I can't find any reference to it being changed/fixed/replaced/killed. There's a userscript called "youtube link title" if you have tampermonkey that does the same thing. However it doesn't work out of the box anymore because it relies on google api, and the api key that's hardcoded into the script expired or got deleted or something. See the firefox thread starting here.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:Is there a way to lock down chrome extensions so they can't make network requests? quote:e: Do google do anything to stop people writing total honey trap extensions? They try. They have automated tools that try to detect nefarious behavior, and they remove / revoke extensions that do bad things. But it's a trust system and you shouldn't install extensions that you don't have reason to trust. There have been popular extensions where the author sold control to adware or malware fuckos. On the scale of how much it can gently caress you, a browser extension is closer to a piece of random software than a random website. I'd visit shadywebsite.com sooner than I'd run shadyprogram.exe if I had to choose. That particular extension I'd be ok trusting, it's been around since 2013.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Kheldarn posted:Well, it sucks, because it screws things up when I browse reddit. I tend to click where https://www. is to replace it with old. and it selects part of it, and then either part of the [url]https://[/url] or part of the reddit. sections of the URL. there's a much smarter way to accomplish what you want https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/40897-old-reddit-please
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
Mr.Radar posted:There is a bit more Settle down, it only hides http and www at the front of a url. IE the parts that are entirely irrelevant to anyone that isn't Kheldarn or other weirdos who constantly re-type https://www.reddit.com to old.reddit.com by hand. If you go to any site that leads the domain with anything other than www, it shows the sub-domain title. (Like, you know that if sign up a reddit account then you can just tell it to always use old reddit?)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2019 18:07
|
|
take on it where it's part of Google's plan to kill URLs and force people to use search to access everything (see also AMP).
|
Jippa posted:I was reading that this new update will kill ublock origin for good? Is that true? No, not yet. They just added manifest v3 to Canary (the alpha / testing branch of Chrome), which means it might go live in Chrome v80. But they're going to keep manifest v2 (what extensions use now) and v3 (the one that neuters adblock) both active at the same time. And then "v2 end of life to be determined in the future" which you should actually read as "when we think the mass audience has forgotten about the uproar and we've used financial support of Adblock Plus to get them moved to v3, so we can fight back by pitting users against each other and blame gorhil for being a bad stick in the mud who refused to adapt like ABP". In the meantime you have at least 6 months to try out other browsers and pick which one you like best. Klyith fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Nov 12, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2019 15:09
|
|
|
This:Stormgale posted:https://twitter.com/antumbral/status/1194973121888976896?s=19 Hipster_Doofus posted:I can totally believe this, since you already can't on Android without tricking it. so now I have an addon for firefox-android that disables Page Visibility API rather than needing to force the desktop site (which my 720p phone can't really display).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
For the rest of the thread, this doc is what Combat Pretzel is going on about. It isn't too technical for an average nerd to grasp. But the tl;dr is basically "oh the simple API that MS made for getting occlusion status isn't precise enough for us, we're gonna do it the hard way" and then lists a whole bunch of giant downsides of the hard way  However: Combat Pretzel posted:--edit: Still, it seems like a dumb and fragile way to do things. You can't trust windows programs to tell you sane things about themselves, which is probably why it broke on terminal server. Even after their effort to discard stuff like complex or transparent windows, some program said that it had the entire screen region when it didn't so chrome thought it was occluded.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
EngineerJoe posted:Is there an extension that will clear cookies for a specific website each time I visit it? I'm trying to avoid clearing cookies manually when visiting NYT and other news sites. I use cookie autodelete on FF and it has a chrome version. It can't clear local storage on chrome though, just cookies.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2020 06:13
|
|
|
space marine todd posted:Suggestions for an extension that lets me define a blacklist/whitelist for cookies? It's been the easiest way for me to bypass paywalls for sites like The Atlantic. I use Cookie AutoDelete on Firefox. The problem for Chrome is that Chrome doesn't let extensions touch Local Storage. Some paywalled websites have caught on to the cookie thing and use local storage data instead. The other thing that works on some sites is using UBlock in advanced mode where it can block javascript completely. (At least, it does until whatever version of chrome that will get rid of advanced asblocking.)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2020 02:06
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:At least uBlock Origin is still reliable, right? It is until whichever version when google decides to remove manifest V2 support, then ublock doesn't work and chrome users get forced back into adblock-in-2005 level blocking. That's still "TBD" on their timeline though.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2020 14:06
|
|
|
Brave is a cryptocurrency grift. Right now they're grifting investors and ICO hounds and buttcoiners with their idiotic BAT thing. You can say, that's fine by me, I'm not one of those people. So I'm just gonna use the browser and ignore the crypto bullshit. But grifters gonna grift, so my advice to any Brave user would be to at least keep on top of what's happening with the browser. Someday they may run out of other fools and look for new targets. Mostly I can't imagine using brave when vivaldi exists and isn't run by the people brave is run by.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2020 15:36
|
|
|
deoju posted:Hey, I don't really hang out in SH/SC, I don't know if this is the right place to ask this... No, you're not going to be able to grab stuff from netflix etc without extraordinary efforts. VVVVV edit: well poo poo this was wrong. I tried several apps on chrome and edge and none worked, but amazon won't even let my install of firefox play vids so I didn't try anything with firefox. The easiest way I know of to rip this type of thing is a splitter box that says "yes I'm a HDCP-compliant TV, you can give me video" but actually strips the protection and passes unprotected video back out, which you then feed into a HD capture card. Once you have that stuff it's relatively simple -- which shows again how useless DRM is at preventing piracy. But you have to buy stuff and make it work. Get DVDs and rip them, that's easy and there are a zillion easy to follow instructions and programs for that. Klyith fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Oct 22, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2020 06:04
|
|
|
DreamScythe posted:Just discovered that the Web of Trust extension has some pretty severe privacy issues, any recommendations for a replacement? ublock origin w/ 3rd party script blocking (it's a replacement in that rather than rely on randos to tell you if sites are trustworthy, you don't trust them)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
Cheese Thief posted:Real question, why would anyone use Chrome when there is Chromium? Don't you get all the benefit of the Chrome exerience, minus the (selling your privacy) to Google? FOSS == ethical; Proprietary == non-ethical, or did I just drink the koolaid thinking this. For a general audience, chromium does not automatically update by default which is a strong reason to stick with google and let the reptoids have some data. When google discovers a zero-day they patch chrome first and then send the update to the open repo. Also is does not come with widevine drm video plugin, so you can't play netflix amazon etc out of the box. That's fixable but involves downloading regular chrome and extracting the widevine plugin yourself. For people who can handle that amount of set up, manage a separate updater, & browse safely and with ublock, it's fine. Also there's Vivaldi which is chrome-based and doesn't collect personal data. That is my main recommendation for a browser for people that prioritize privacy, as it's good and isn't run by buttcoin libertarians. (But it has a different UI, which you may or may not like.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
101 posted:Brave is open source and prioritises privacy though. Surely that puts it above Vivalid when you can just not enable the crypto stuff Basically my personal take on the cryptocurrency thing is that it says to me that Brave is run by grifters. They've already done some super griftery things like their donation scam and redirects on addresses. If I used Brave, how long will it be before the grift is turned on me? The people making it have demonstrated themselves to not be honest. That's why I won't use it and would not tell other people to use it. And then there's the politics of Eich which are still techbro libertarian even if his stance on LBGT issues has improved. Finally, my general take on the data collection issue with google is that Chrome is pretty much the last thing to get rid of. Google is probably collecting your data no matter what browser you're using, because google is goddamn ubiquitous on the internet. They have 100 ways to track and data-collect from us, and Chrome is the least of it. Here are things you need to do besides not using Chrome, if you don't want google watching you: • not having a google account (or not browsing anywhere else while logged into your google account + cleaning cookies & local storage after logging out) • not having an android phone, or at least minimizing your phone use • not watching videos on youtube (or treating youtube the same as a google account as above) • not using google to search • having ublock & privacy badger (or some other even more strict tracking-blocker) installed on your browser Ditching Chrome and continuing to interact with Google every time you touch the internet is putting your head under a blanket. Ditching Chrome for other reasons, or a mix of privacy and other reasons, is great. But if your concerns are 100% privacy there's a whole lot of other stuff to do.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
Regular uBlock can do script blocking, which is what 95% of people used uMatrix for. It can also do 3rd party content blocking, just not break the content down into all the individual categories... but all that detail was really not that useful. That's why the author ceased work on uMatrix. Use ublock, check "I'm an advanced user", block 3rd party scripts, ditch other script blockers. The other thing uMatrix would do that uBlock doesn't handle was cookie blocking -- but these days you need something that handles both cookies and local storage. Privacy Badger is a good simple option. What I use though is Cookie Auto-delete. It's a basic white/greylist model that's easy enough, edit lol I didn't notice that this was the Chrome thread not the Firefox thread, Chrome doesn't let extensions touch local storage. On chrome you're always a bit compromised if you want max paranoia anti-tracking. Klyith fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jan 23, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
Kheldarn posted:Is there a setting/flag/extention that will make Chrome go to the next tab to the right of the tab I just closed instead of back to the tab on the left? https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/simpletaborder/cekafjbmkfofacenifehbglhmajimhjf
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2021 01:17
|
|
|
Allyn posted:And nada. Still getting images only halfway loading, like this: Regardless of the chrome error message, the symptoms seem more like your connection is crapping out than anything misconfigured with SSL itself. Possibly chrome is saying SSL error because your connection drops out long enough to reset the SSL connection? Allyn posted:And even if they weren't, it's been happening for the better part of a year(!)) So I'm guessing you've rebooted your router & cable modem in that time. You might want to try looking at your router's support for a firmware upgrade, and do a reset to defaults on it. Also chrome now does DNSSEC stuff and the router can gently caress that up, though normally I'd expect it to just fail & fallback to normal DNS in that case.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
Palladium posted:On the latest update or so, they are also really passive-aggressive at saving their video bandwidth on the official Youtube app. Default video resolution no longer permanently sticks to the max device resolution, and there's also an extra tap to select the resolution on every single video. Doubt it's for saving bandwidth on google's end. They've got plenty. Saving battery (and possibly cell data) so that people watch more youtubes is the more likely reason.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
 It's happening! No more uBlock, starting Jan 2022!(They will still allow updates to V2 extensions until 2023, but 50/50 imo whether gorhill keeps updating. He's already pretty disgusted with google.) So now is the time to transition to a different browser if you want high-quality adblock. Firefox still exists and has pledged to keep the functionality that uBlock needs. Vivaldi is an alt-chromium, and has said they'll keep V2 active. Brave is run by homophobic crypto bros, but is doing the same. Edge, last I saw, is going to follow google's lead.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
jokes posted:I also wasn’t aware of Brave’s problems, This is just my personal feeling about Brave, but to me anyone heavily promoting crypto bullshit falls in the category of "grifter" and that makes them fundamentally untrustable. But also I very much dislike how they promote themselves by saying "we'll stop the Big Guys from doing X Y and Z to our users". But then they've done X2, Ψ, and Ƨ with their browser, and their defense seems mostly to be "but we're not a Big Guy, we need revenue!" jokes posted:guess I’m in the market for a better work/porn browser (my Firefox is locked down so hard on the privacy/adblocker front it’s hard to use it reliably for work/porn). Yes. They also have a firm anti-data-collection promise, but that just means they don't do data collection themselves from their own users. Vivaldi doesn't have any built-in adblock or tracker blocking like Brave does, so as a direct replacement for Brave it needs ublock and such.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
Natsuumi posted:What will be the ad blocking options? Or is it basically gone? I don't really want to go to another browser but it sounds like I'll be forced to. There will be extremely lovely ad blocking. Adblock Plus will still be there, but even that will be worse than before (ABP uses EasyList out of the box, EasyList alone has 2x the rules allowed by the new chrome). And all the advanced things that uBlock can do are right out. Think ad blocking as it was before like 2010 but the ad networks still have the last decade of practice in making ads that are hard to block. (It's also gonna kill all the *monkey extensions, because V3 also bans "remotely-hosted code" which really means all code that's not in the extension package.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2021 04:36
|
|
|
Fame Douglas posted:Then why did Apple do the same thing years ago. There are very obvious security arguments for why extensions shouldn't have the access they currently have. There are equally obvious security arguments for why a random 3rd party ad network shouldn't be allowed to run arbitrary javascript in my browser just because they paid someone a nickel. This has historically been a huge source of drive-by malware, when sufficiently nasty browser zero-days were discovered. Plus actual hacks have happened because websites were compromised enough to insert an additional script load from evilfakecdn.com which then stole CCs or passwords. (The Newegg hack worked like this.) If you believe that the new extension architecture will prevent malicious software, I've got a bridge to sell you. And if they do, it'll be because extensions become so useless that, like desktop Safari, hardly anyone uses the extensions (or the browser). And finally, if neutering adblock wasn't a priority, they could have made the blocking API that will exist in V3 more powerful. They could have made a full-featured system with full wildcard / regex ability and unlimited rules. They didn't, they made something purposefully mediocre. zachol posted:If anything I'd think it would be the reverse, Google seemed for a while to be trying to break non-google advertising and setting up their own method that sidesteps the usual tracking. Possibly same with Apple recently: Apple's iPhone privacy changes signal desire to enter advertising
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2021 04:01
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:Is there anything stopping an adblocker from just killing the whole tab if unwanted content is displayed/processed? If so, then there's really no negative security implications, since the unwanted code will remain unprocessed in both. In the new system extensions can't see themselves what the page is loading. They can only pass a list of unwanted content to the browser, and the browser is what stops it. And that list is both finite, way more static than before, and has no greylist ability. So evilfakecdn.com can't be blocked until you put it on the blocklist. Additionally the ability that uBlock has to block scripts but allow static content is gone. So no, the security advantage of blocking scripts or other content is pretty much gone.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2021 13:29
|
|
|
Sininu posted:Will Firefox soon be the only sensible option if you never want to see any ads? "Soon" as in sometime in 2023 or perhaps later, and Vivaldi is also a totally sensible option.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2021 13:59
|
|
|
Malloc Voidstar posted:So what's the best near-Chrome browser? ungoogled-chromium? Vivaldi. Not run by crypto-bros, has a good privacy / no data collection policy, gets automatic updates.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
OgNar posted:I've been having a problem with Youtube for quite awhile. Youtube caches a large amount of data locally to your computer, and can have weird problems based on that. A different problem I experienced with youtube's UI being hosed up was solved by clearing all youtube & google cookies and local storage.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:So this Manifest V3 bullshit that's coming and loving over adblocking extensions... any way to deal with this? I'm running Adguard Home as DNS relay here on my network, but that only blocks traffic to specific servers, and won't deal with inline stuff. Any other possibilities, should the doom and gloom prove correct? Like some HTTP(S) proxy type of solution? Switch to a browser that's not made by a company that's strongly motivated to kill adblocking? Vivaldi is chrome with a different UI. Adguard has HTTPS filtering but you have to buy the paid tier to get it lol.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 04:11
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Eh, since it's a core part of Chromium and I don't expect other Chromium based browsers to keep a forever fork, they're all affected. The function that is critical isn't being removed from the chromium codebase, it's only blocked from use by ManifestV3 extensions. The main thing that the chromium-based browsers need to do is keep Manifest V2 active. From my understanding (via reporting and devs on social media, I don't know poo poo about chromium code myself) this is not a difficult chunk of code to maintain. Will google make that harder in the future for the alt browsers? Could be. But I don't think it's likely because, even with the adblock poo poo, I don't see Vivaldi or Firefox seriously challenging for market share. Google can sabotage competitors in much more efficient and subtle ways.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Is there any particular reason why Chromium based browsers refuse to resolve anything at all, as soon the Internet connection to the outside world is down, despite a local DNS server that keeps working just fine? My guess would be DNSSEC in combo with the configuration of your router's DNS settings + adguard, plus any DNS manually set on the system. Background, how the two browsers handle DNSSEC: 1. Firefox uses a canary domain. If it can resolve that address, it ignores the OS configuration entirely and sends DNS lookups to cloudflare's secure DNS-over-HTTPS service. If it can't, it uses the system DNS. 2. Chromium (by default) looks to the system DNS and attempts to get secure connections with them. If there are multiple DNS options and only some of them provide DNSSEC, it will use those and avoid the unsecure ones. So if you have other DNS servers available in your router's DCHP, or have manually configured DNS on your system, your Chromium browsers may be avoiding the adguard DNS. DNSSEC has made doing poo poo with local DNS like adblocking a much bigger pain.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2022 15:40
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Adguard is the only DNS server Chromium knows about, per ipconfig and considering I have my DHCP server serve only its IP as DNS service. When I stop the Adguard container, resolves in the browser break as expected. What's uncool is that it also breaks when the upstream connection goes down. There's no reason for that, IMO. As said earlier, the system resolver (via nslookup) keeps resolving just fine. I mean I understand if it doesn't resolve say google.com, because it relies on upstream data (if the cache is cold, anyway), but the rewrites should keep working. I don't think DNSSEC should matter on a local .home TLD.  DNSSEC is the place where I know that the browsers have very different behavior for DNS resolve, but it could definitely be something else. Neither FF nor chrome cache DNS to disk, so if they were both freshly opened it must be something with the network setup.But I can't replicate your result: if the internet is down, my router "helpfully" redirects all http traffic to a router page telling me that the internet is down. Including local domain results!  And that's consistent on both browsers. Anyways my suggestion is just putting network appliances on static IPs and typing numbers.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2022 03:01
|
|
|
The United States posted:RIP Vanced, yet another project killed by Google (lawyers) lol apparently Vanced was just a modification and redistribution of the actual google Youtube app. So it was 100% infringing copyright in and of itself, not just something like youtube-dl where the code is original and users are the ones doing any infringement. And then they did some sort of NFT thing, that was apparently just a joke, but still involved putting real NFTs on a market that someone could theoretically buy. If you're Doing Crimes, don't gently caress around.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2022 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 17:36 |
|
|
Mozi posted:I've been using Vivaldi for a little while and in the last few days I've started having an issue where it'll become very laggy and videos choppy and stop loading until I restart my PC. Hate to be the "works for me" guy, but I've used Vivaldi as my youtube & internet video browser for ages and never had problems. If a full PC restart was fixing things I think that indicates a problem beyond just Vivaldi the program, because otherwise restarting the browser alone would have done it. One thing I might try would be a video driver clean reinstall using DDU, in case the issue is that video decode acceleration was messed up.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2022 17:40
|
|