21
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I said it for Waterfox and I'm gonna say it again for Firefox: this is good. At worst, it's just fine (Mozilla just uses it internally to replace or supplement its old and incomplete Tracker Blocking system, which never gets the same scrutiny).

The biggest difference between Firefox and Waterfox in implementation is the WaterFox developers noticed this FF change early, and committed to providing full-fledged ad blocking out of the box, which is great news for users.

A few more reasons this is good:

  1. Rust is faster than JavaScript
  2. Native functionality is faster than an extension
  3. Actual ad blocking is something Firefox users have been begging Mozilla to do
[-] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Rust is faster than JavaScript

isn't ublock's filtering compiled to webassembly?

Actual ad blocking is something Firefox users have been begging Mozilla to do

seems a bit dangerous though to risk for a browser with so small market share

[-] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

isn't ublock's filtering compiled to webassembly?

From my unprofessional glance ar their repository, it uses a little, but not much. Take a look at their code; all or most of the filtering is done in JavaScript, the webassembly appears to be just ~~one~~ two modules. (It's in the "wasm" folder near the top of the list).

(Edit: I was looking at outdated code; the newer version uses more, but IMO pales in comparison to the JavaScript filtering logic)

seems a bit dangerous though to risk for a browser with so small market share

Waterfox has a much smaller market share and much smaller budget, and was able to clear this with search partners just by promising not to block ads on them by default.

[-] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 1 points 1 month ago

Rust is faster than JavaScript

isn't ublock's filtering compiled to webassembly?

The slow thing usually is the DOM manipulation anyways.

[-] zewm@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Using technology from a known crypto scamming developer is not good.

[-] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Using entirely unrelated ad blocking technology is bad for what reason?

You can feel free to moralize, but be consistent: Mozilla bought an NFT company to integrate their code into Firefox, and that's not the only skeleton in their closet.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Oh they have a whole cemetery of a city in the basement.

Still doesnt excuse it IMO.

[-] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

we were shocked and disappointed by the amount of fraud in crypto and NFT

That sounds so funny, somehow

[-] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago

I can hate more than one of Mozilla's decisions.

this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
21 points (92.0% liked)

Technology

84965 readers
978 users here now

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


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS