userscripts VS uBlock

Hi, I'm Will. I'm 24, autistic, and have OCD tendencies. I'm learning to code and this is my first public project. I’d really appreciate your feedback and encouragement!

This project lets me solve some of my OCD problems online. There are a couple of parts of the forums that I visit – Space Battles, Sufficient Velocity, and Questionable Questing – that I want to remove. Specifically, I hate seeing indicators of how much is left in a forum thread, because I keep thinking about how much content is left. It stops me from immersing myself in the story. It stressed me out. Before I learned to code, I'd use my hand to block the total chapter count so I could read the blurb and see the word count. I would do my best to ignore the page navigation bar except for the next page button, but I usually ended up failing. One of the reasons I always read in full-screen Safari is that I didn't have to see the tab name that always had the page number. I learned not to hover my cursor over the window because it would tell me the page number.

This project is a series of userscripts that hide those indicators. I coded the userscripts in JavaScript, and I'm using [userscripts](https://github.com/quoid/userscripts) as the system. Despite the fact I didn't know what a userscript was until I started coding them, AI assistance allowed me to code them with minimal help from my brother, Stevie. Khanmigo helped me plan, write, and debug code. ChatGPT taught me the theory. Part of the reason I coded a lot faster with the later userscripts is I knew enough to realize when AI was talking about something irrelevant and redirect it. One cool moment was when I correctly predicted I didn't need to code different userscripts for SpaceBattles and Sufficient Velocity because Sufficient Velocity used to be part of SpaceBattles.

I find it relaxing not to have to worry about accidentally seeing the chapter count or the final page number. Maybe they’ll help one of you!

You can use userscripts [1] which is a safari extension which allows you to add userscripts, and the author of this work have an userscript [2] that you can use with safari (or any other browser)

[1] https://github.com/quoid/userscripts

[2] https://github.com/imdj/HNRelevant/blob/main/HNRelevant.user...

That Safari also supports UserScripts and Extensions also somewhat mutes some of Arc's benefits, so it will be interesting to see how/if Arc responds.

UserScripts (More explanation on Github)

}`

In Safari, using Userscripts extension: https://github.com/quoid/userscripts#userscripts-safari

You might want to take a look at this Safari Extension for userscripts on iOS.

https://github.com/quoid/userscripts

Try this userscript. In Safari you can install userscripts via free extension

Strict Mode wrapper prevents @require libs from working (1.3.2)

Something like https://github.com/quoid/userscripts seems like what you want.

Ask the developer on GitHub: https://github.com/quoid/userscripts/issues

Check out uBlock Origin's per site switches [1]

[1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-...

If ads, in particular on YouTube, are the problem, anything Chromium-based is probably only going to get worse and worse (see [1] and [2]). So that basically leaves you with Firefox and Safari.

I work for Mozilla (speaking for myself, of course), so I'll leave you to guess which I'd recommend :P

[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

[2] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/09/googles-widely-oppos...

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Or if on mobile, it is well worth it to look up adblock options for the browser you use.

What are the compelling advantages of Chrome nowadays?

Chrome is working to limit the capabilities of ad blockers:

https://www.malwarebytes.com/blog/news/2023/11/chrome-pushes...

Whereas a compelling advantage of Firefox is that uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

Advertising networks have often been vectors for malware. Using an ad blocker is an important security measure. Even the FBI recommends ad blockers:

https://www.malwarebytes.com/malvertising

https://theconversation.com/spyware-can-infect-your-phone-or...

https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221?=8324278624

> It allows for 30,000 dynamic rules

That is not what we mean by dynamic filters. From https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-fi...

> However, to support more frequent updates and user-defined rules, extensions can add rules dynamically too, without their developers having to upload a new version of the extension to the Chrome Web Store.

What Chrome is talking about is the ability to specify rules at runtime. What critics of Manifest V3 are talking about is not the ability to dynamically add rules (although that can be an issue), it is the ability to add dynamic rules -- ie rules that analyze and rewrite requests in the style of the blockingWebRequest permission.

It's a little deceptive to claim that the concerns here are outdated and to point to vague terminology that sounds like it's correcting the problem, but on actual inspection turns out to be entirely separate functionality from what the GP was talking about.

> Giving this ability to extensions can slow down the browser for the user. These ads can still be blocked through other means.

This is the debate; most of the adblocking community disagrees with this assertion. uBO maintains a list of some common features that are already not possible to support in Chrome ( https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b... ) and has written about features that are not able to be supported via Chrome's current V3 API ( https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as... ). Of particular note are filtering for large media elements (I use this a lot on mobile Firefox, it's great for reducing page size), and top-level filtering of domains/fonts.

> "Its happened before"

> That's not an argument

It's a subheading to "2. Browser engine monopoly". The subsection's purpose is describing how bad things were during the IE monopoly to reinforce that it's something to be avoided.

> in fact you could counter-argue that IE left a lot of technical debt

That would be agreeing with the article, unless I understand what you mean.

> On top of that, the internet was very different back then.

In a way that now makes it harder for truly new competing engines to pop up due to increased complexity of the web.

> I'm still not convinced, why would I change my browser?

The points made in the article are:

* Increased privacy, opposed to willingly giving your data to an ad-tech company

* Helps avoid a browser engine monopoly which would effectively let Google dictate web standards

* It’s fast and has a nice user interface

Onto which I'd add:

* Content blockers work best on Firefox (https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...), doubly so when Manifest V3 rolls out

* Allows more customization of interface and home page

* UX improvements, like the clutter-free reader mode, aren't vetoed to protect search revenue as with Chrome (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37675467)

Advertising networks are vectors for malware:

https://www.cisecurity.org/insights/blog/malvertising

https://www.malwarebytes.com/malvertising

https://theconversation.com/spyware-can-infect-your-phone-or...

So if you're concerned about security then you want the browser with the best ad blocker.

uBlock Origin works best in Firefox:

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...