Further, uBO has the best performance among other ad blockers, including AdBlock, Adguard, and Ghostery. UBO also refuses to take money from companies to whitelist certain “acceptable ads” for-profit, unlike other ad blockers, including Adblock Plus (ABP). It’s open-source and transparent, but even better, the developer Raymond Hill refuses to take donations and claims he has no intent to ever monetize uBO. UBlock Origin is one of the safest and most trustworthy content filtering add-ons available. Both tools allow you to pick and choose which website elements to remove from a website, but the Zapper is temporary while the Picker is permanent. UBO provides two powerful tools to allow users to perform “cosmetic filtering.” These tools are the Element Zapper and the Element Picker. These scam versions steal user data for profit. There are several add-ons pretending to be uBO, including and uBlock (without the Origin). Note: When installing uBO, make sure that the add-on is uBlock Origin. Unfortunately, it’s no longer available for Apple’s Safari. UBO is available on the Google Chrome web store, on Chromium, Microsoft Edge, Opera, and as a Mozilla Firefox add-on (including the Android and iOS versions). Hard mode is like medium mode on steroids and is likely to cause more website breaks for a final small gain in security. This is the recommended mode for privacy-savvy users. Do you contact to the software developers to support those modded things? I'm pretty sure most of them don't have any eagers to support your desire.Medium mode is for advanced users and requires in-depth knowledge of the add-on, enabling users to manually decide what content is filtered and what is allowed. This is like some teams create a modded Windows version to run on some peculiar devices that Microsoft doesn't have any support and it causes some softwares not running well on it. That being said, we have informed Kiwi's dev about the flaw of their "disabling adblock" broken code several months ago, and it's still there. Then you can experience how it turns out. You can do it yourself: fork the project, contact the browsers, fix bugs, publish and maintain it.
Looks like you still think it's easy and really want someone to do the contacts and develop the extensions for you? Dev himself does not have time for that. Where are those indications from the browsers you mention? There must be guidelines, documentations and bug trackers for developer to build, keep track and maintain it. And there are no standard process for extensions to develop and maintain on those browsers.Įxtensions do not appear from nowhere. They implement their own tweaks/hacks (some of them just being a black box closed-source) to make extensions running, there are no "support" from chromium team. Those browsers do not implement "support" for extensions. I'm afraid you don't understand the logic.
0 kommentar(er)
