[HN Gopher] A curated list of uBlock origin filters
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A curated list of uBlock origin filters
        
       Author : spacebuffer
       Score  : 218 points
       Date   : 2023-07-04 11:43 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (letsblock.it)
 (TXT) w3m dump (letsblock.it)
        
       | TekMol wrote:
       | I wonder if uBlock origin has overshot the mark.
       | 
       | It even blocks self-hosted analytics scripts from the same
       | domain. By default.
       | 
       | I don't see how that is a good thing. It just makes the lives of
       | people who run websites harder. When I visit a website, I have
       | some sympathy towards the person who runs it.
       | 
       | Disabling scripts which talk to self-hosted analytics software
       | makes it hard to figure out how users use a website. Especially
       | when the site is using a CDN. So people enable tracking on the
       | CDN level. Which means now CloudFlare, Amazon etc store that data
       | again. Lose-lose for everybody.
        
         | bunga-bunga wrote:
         | I share this sentiment. I use content blockers to avoid
         | annoyances and trackers, but I'm ok with _healthy_ ads and
         | other local stats. The problem is not being able to distinguish
         | them at scale.
        
           | somsak2 wrote:
           | > I'm ok with _healthy_ ads
           | 
           | no such thing as a healthy ad!
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | It is frustrating. At the end of the day uBlock can only block
         | what it can see. If I'm an asshole web host I can still take
         | your IP and every other bit of data that I can gobble up from
         | the HTTP headers and sell those off to the highest bidder and
         | uBlock can't do anything about that. So, nefarious actors still
         | be nefarious actors.
         | 
         | Disclaimer: I use uBlock.
        
         | mcpackieh wrote:
         | > _It just makes the lives of people who run websites harder._
         | 
         |  _User_ agent. The browser is meant to serve the user 's
         | interests. The wants or desires of people who run websites are
         | their own problems, not the _user_ agent 's problems.
         | 
         | I don't even run first party javascript by default, only on a
         | whitelist basis. Most of the time, even first party javascript
         | only makes the website worse from my perspective as a user.
         | Javascript's most common purpose is to implement annoyances and
         | spyware, legitimate functionality comes third.
        
         | nathanlied wrote:
         | It is an unfortunate reality of how the Internet is built.
         | 
         | There's quite a few people like you, that are fine with self-
         | hosted analytics, either because you believe the principles of
         | the websites you visit, or because you've done so-called "good"
         | analytics, and so disable that kind of blocking, hoping your
         | trust won't be abused.
         | 
         | Problem is, some of us don't believe those principles hold,
         | and/or have seen people doing vacuum-style analytics. I've
         | listened to conversations of otherwise well-intentioned devs
         | who are otherwise anti-ads and anti-unnecessary data collection
         | ask for more data to be collected in analytics because "we
         | might need it". Leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. So I
         | block it all - what I can, of course. If they find ways around
         | it that I can't block, at least I've done my best.
        
         | 5e92cb50239222b wrote:
         | Same domain doesn't always mean your information won't get
         | leaked to wherever. For example, Sentry supports sending data
         | through a proxy hosted on the same domain used by the website.
         | If you don't block it, your data ends up on sentry.io anyway
         | (in most cases; some users probably self-host their own Sentry
         | instance, but how many? It's quite painful from my personal
         | experience.)
         | 
         | https://docs.sentry.io/platforms/javascript/troubleshooting/...
        
         | jabbany wrote:
         | > makes it hard to figure out how users use a website
         | 
         | Isn't that the whole point? A user with the no tracking filters
         | turned on in uBO is intentionally trying to opt out. I don't
         | have much sympathy for site owners unless they also offer a
         | first party opt-out option (which I've never seen so far even
         | given the cookie banners). Site owners are no more entitled to
         | track than a site user is to block even first party trackers.
         | (Also wouldn't a site owner be able to use server logs
         | anyways?)
         | 
         | As for defaults, I think when it comes to the point that
         | someone is installing uBO specifically, they're usually
         | sophiscated enough to configure filters. Most of the people I
         | know (even those in tech) don't use any form of adblock or
         | tracking blocking. (I don't know how they can manage to always
         | be vigilant and avoid all the dark patterns, but to each their
         | own.)
        
         | wahnfrieden wrote:
         | I think we put up with a lot because we give smaller businesses
         | a pass on bad practices and focus our energy on the "bad"
         | bigger players. But I don't think being an underdog means that
         | society should accept PII surveillance - society is made up of
         | underdogs.
        
       | Pannoniae wrote:
       | I find it sad how many websites, or even programs have
       | atrociously low information density. In our quest to flat and
       | minimalistic design(tm), we have managed to lower information
       | density so much that very simple websites require lots of
       | scrolling and menu-opening just to get simple information.
        
         | JTon wrote:
         | I read a comment on a forum where the user had a job to audit
         | google home voice command and search result alignment. Meaning,
         | did the google home user get what they wanted or not. The forum
         | user made a side comment on how a surprising number of people
         | have horrible diction. Makes me think, maybe low information
         | density is the optimal design for the majority of users.
        
           | ajsnigrutin wrote:
           | Maybe it's users intentionally simplifying their speech,
           | because google doesn't understand more complex sentances.
        
             | martin_a wrote:
             | I find myself doing this (and feeling stupid doing so) with
             | my Amazon Echo Dots. They seem to understand very little,
             | so I simplify and reduce like crazy. Nevertheless, lots of
             | searches/commands go wrong.
             | 
             | Good example probably: I've tried to play music from German
             | rap artist "Disarstar" which is pronounced like "disaster".
             | I did not get Alexa to play music from this artist from
             | Spotify, it only searched for "disaster" and played music
             | it found... Not a good experience.
        
           | xedrac wrote:
           | My wife is one of these people - an artistic ADHD type whose
           | brain bounces around in a very non-linear way. The commands
           | she speaks to Google leave me completely confused.
        
           | OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
           | Techmoan nailed it here:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvNPMlATA9g
        
           | Dalewyn wrote:
           | Information density as we had it in the 90s and 2000s was far
           | too dense, let's be real. _We_ might have liked it, but most
           | people essentially saw an insurmountable column of text and
           | immediately keeled over, eyes glazed. The response to reduce
           | information density in and of itself is reasonable.
           | 
           | What isn't reasonable is how low information density has
           | gotten. Yes, information was too dense before, but now we
           | have the opposite problem: It's not dense enough. There is a
           | fine balance in density that designers seemingly can't seem
           | to find.
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | Not too dense if you were used to read newspapers and
             | magazines.
        
               | nofunsir wrote:
               | Or, ya know, books.
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | Magazines and newspapers interleaved articles and news;
               | books were just either straight stories or short tale
               | compilations, there were no short tales in the middle of
               | a page or at the bottom/top/edge placed sides.
        
         | 5e92cb50239222b wrote:
         | Now I wonder if that's the reason we ended up with 7-inch
         | smartphone displays.
        
       | HeckFeck wrote:
       | > YouTube: search interface cleanups
       | 
       | Ah, finally someone has done it. YouTube search without the 'For
       | you' and 'from your history' guff.
        
         | vidyesh wrote:
         | I have disabled YouTube Watch history and I really enjoy seeing
         | YouTube struggle to provide me anything meaningful in the Home
         | feed. Most suggestions are just based on my subscriptions and I
         | see a lot of repeated suggestions as it doesn't know what I
         | have watched.
         | 
         | This keeps me away from the echo chamber that it creates for
         | most people.
        
         | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
         | Why do you use YouTube while signed in ?
         | 
         | All the past 12-14 years I've used YouTube, it was always in a
         | private window. With or without login. Earlier I had an account
         | but when google signup was mandated, I quit and since then I
         | just manually go and search for stuff.
         | 
         | I have newpipe and libretube on my phone so I have some
         | semblance of "subscriptions and channels" but not much.
        
       | OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
       | I've never gotten the hang of writing uBO rules for myself.
       | There's a lot more to it than is in the tutorial. Learned about
       | letsblock.it last week through a support request to the uBO
       | project and it has been a great help. It is very good at
       | filtering out low quality search results sites[0]. Additionally
       | it takes the pain out of blocking sites or domains I don't want
       | to see.
       | 
       | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29794372
        
       | dpifke wrote:
       | I use uBlock Origin for a banlist of sites and keywords that are
       | repeat offenders for off-topic[0] HN posts:
       | https://pifke.org/hn.txt
       | 
       | My rules hide the title line but not the number of
       | comments/points, and sometimes I'll click through stories that
       | have been highly upvoted, to see what I'm missing (rarely
       | anything of interest to me).
       | 
       | [0]: I consider "off-topic" to be anything "they'd cover on TV
       | news," per https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. A
       | lot of the blocked sites are quite literally TV news sites.
        
         | xvello wrote:
         | Heya, you can take inspiration the rules I posted in
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35676840 for hiding the
         | second line and the separator. I messed up the last newline,
         | the bottom block is the following two lines:
         | news.ycombinator.com##html:not([op="item"]) tr.spacer +
         | tr:not(.athing):remove()
         | news.ycombinator.com##html:not([op="item"]) tr.spacer +
         | tr.spacer:remove()
         | 
         | I'll make it a letsblock.it template one day.
        
       | OldManRyan wrote:
       | I use the extension BlockTube to filter out videos by channel and
       | I think it works pretty well since I only need to right click on
       | a video and can block the entire channel. That means you have to
       | trust another extension.
       | 
       | That being said, it is an understatement to say I can't tolerate
       | the internet without uBlock Origin. I get so much value out of
       | this project I would donate 10-20% of my salary to the project if
       | they allowed donations.
        
         | small_coconut wrote:
         | I can't use Youtube without Blocktube. Currently at 11,000
         | blocked channels and still going strong - it's amazing how the
         | same junk keeps cropping up just under different names.
        
           | mosquitobiten wrote:
           | I wish I knew about it sooner, it took me almost a year to
           | "train" the algo to recommended me only certain topics of
           | interest. I could've saved some scrolling time at the
           | beginning.
        
         | romseb wrote:
         | For YouTube, I go the other way and instead of blacklisting
         | channels, I use https://unhook.app to only see my subscriptions
         | and nothing else. No Home feed suggestions, no sidebar, no end
         | screen cards, etc.
        
           | Already__Taken wrote:
           | there are some gems the YT homepage can bring you. be sure to
           | delete the dumb meme recap you watched at 3am from the watch
           | history and the algorithm can work for you.
        
             | mosquitobiten wrote:
             | Oh, wow. Didn't know I can do that. Thanks, it was getting
             | really hard to train the algo again with the things I want
             | recommended on a certain account after accidentally
             | searching for something of interest for another account.
        
               | xdrosenheim wrote:
               | Be sure to also mark videos as "Not interested" on your
               | homepage, if you also did not know about that. You can
               | even tell them not to recommend an entire channel.
        
               | mosquitobiten wrote:
               | The not interested button doesn't really work for me, it
               | just blocks that particular video but other videos in
               | that category still show up no matter what.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | OldManRyan wrote:
           | Didn't know this extension existed, thank you. I don't
           | actually subscribe to any Youtube channels and mainly search
           | for what I want at the time but this may be a healthier way
           | to use Youtube.
        
           | mistermann wrote:
           | Any idea if this is smart enough to show all new content from
           | your subscriptions or does it only show the select choices
           | that YouTube makes for you (another infuriating YouTube
           | design choice).
        
         | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
         | This is my standard response. Internet without ubo is like
         | having unprotected sex
        
           | Tao3300 wrote:
           | while sandy
        
           | somsak2 wrote:
           | this is such a bad analogy, unprotected sex is objectively
           | way better just riskier. ads on the web are in no way better,
           | and maybe marginally riskier than no ads
        
           | xpil wrote:
           | Like, with another person?
        
             | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
             | No, like digital stimulation of your member.
        
           | BizarreByte wrote:
           | So exciting and dangerous? I may have to give the ad infested
           | internet a try /s
        
       | rx_tx wrote:
       | Another really useful rule I like is for disabling the
       | recommendation overlay that shows up on youtube when you pause a
       | video, which is really annoying.                 youtube-
       | nocookie.com,youtube.com##.ytp-pause-overlay, .show-video-
       | thumbnail-button, #rvid
        
       | butz wrote:
       | What sad state of internet are we in, when users have to jump
       | through hoops just to make browsing websites a little bit more
       | convenient.
        
         | baal80spam wrote:
         | Eh, for the vast majority of websites I'd say: "usable at all",
         | not just "a little bit more convenient."
        
         | somsak2 wrote:
         | interesting point of view. i think content creators would look
         | at it the other way -- never has it been so easy to steal
         | content as it is on an ad-supported internet.
        
       | anonymousab wrote:
       | I wish there was a maintained filter of "video players on news
       | sites".
        
         | xvello wrote:
         | Agreed! That would be a great template to have in
         | letsblock.it's corpus! Contributions are welcome if you have a
         | ruleset to get us kickstarted.
        
       | xvello wrote:
       | Project maintainer here, thanks for posting it!
       | 
       | As described in https://letsblock.it/help/about, this project is
       | a home for rules that cannot be included in the default content
       | blocking lists, because everyone has their own definition of low-
       | value content.
       | 
       | Our goal is to curate a list of templates that allow you to tune
       | up the signal/noise ratio and avoid distractions. You can just
       | copy-paste rules in your uBlockOrigin / AdGuard settings, but the
       | project is best used by signing-up to create your customized rule
       | list. This gives you automatic updates when rules are improved
       | and updated by the community, and the ability to use that list on
       | all your devices.
        
         | m3affan wrote:
         | Awesome work. It's sad to see the internet being ridden by
         | cancerous ads more and more.
        
           | abwizz wrote:
           | cancerous ads are an integral part of the internet since the
           | dot-com boom
           | 
           | so is ad-blocking
        
       | amznburn wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | yuumei wrote:
       | In-case anyone needs it, the following uBlock blocks some of the
       | changes Microsoft made to github, like the cursor and symbol
       | viewer.                 github.com##.code-navigation-cursor
       | github.com###symbols-pane:upward(1)
       | 
       | Unfortunately searching is still broken. This greasemonkey script
       | blocks the capture of keyboard shortcuts like / ctrl space:
       | keycodes = [191, 17, 32]
       | document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {           if
       | (keycodes.indexOf(e.keyCode) != -1)           {
       | e.cancelBubble = true;
       | e.stopImmediatePropagation();           }           return false;
       | });
        
         | ck2 wrote:
         | I wish ublock could do basic url rewrites without having to use
         | greasemonkey/scripts/plugins
         | 
         | Things like rewriting www.reddit to old.reddit without anything
         | extra.
        
           | Grom_PE wrote:
           | After switching browsers, I never actually reinstalled
           | Greasemonkey as uBlock Origin has the capability to inject
           | custom JavaScript.
           | 
           | Check "I am an advanced user", then in "Advanced settings"
           | set the parameter to something like:
           | userResourcesLocation
           | file://localhost/home/user/stuff/scriptlets.js
           | 
           | And in the scriptlets.js file, text between the line "///
           | ScriptName.js" and an empty line is considered a separate
           | scriptlet, which you can add to an URL in "My filters" like:
           | news.ycombinator.com##+js(ScriptName.js)
           | 
           | The annoying bit is that scriptlets are cached, and to update
           | them, you have to edit the "userResourcesLocation" setting,
           | for that reason I made "scriptlets1.js" a symlink to the
           | original file and switch back and forth whenever I edit it.
        
             | ffpip wrote:
             | Thanks for this!
             | 
             | But is a file URL working for you on Windows? http:// URLs
             | are working but file:// urls are not being parsed for me.
        
               | Grom_PE wrote:
               | It certainly worked for me when I used Windows. Try
               | either of these:
               | file:///C:/stuff/scriptlets.js
               | file://localhost/C:/stuff/scriptlets.js
               | 
               | I must say I wouldn't want to add a remote 3rd party URL
               | to this setting, what if it updates with bad code?
        
               | ffpip wrote:
               | Are you using Firefox?
               | 
               | Those URLs do not work for me when using Firefox +
               | Windows. But the code works perfectly fine when I upload
               | it to github gists and use the raw url.
               | 
               | And yeah, like you said do not want to inject remote JS
               | into every site I visit so won't be using a remote URL.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-04 23:03 UTC)