442
submitted 4 days ago by LWD@lemm.ee to c/firefox@lemmy.ml

Mozilla recently removed every version of uBlock Origin Lite from their add-on store except for the oldest version.

Mozilla says a manual review flagged these issues:

Consent, specifically Nonexistent: For add-ons that collect or transmit user data, the user must be informed...

Your add-on contains minified, concatenated or otherwise machine-generated code. You need to provide the original sources...

uBlock Origin's developer gorhill refutes this with linked evidence.

Contrary to what these emails suggest, the source code files highlighted in the email:

  • Have nothing to do with data collection, there is no such thing anywhere in uBOL
  • There is no minified code in uBOL, and certainly none in the supposed faulty files

Even for people who did not prefer this add-on, the removal could have a chilling effect on uBlock Origin itself.

Incidentally, all the files reported as having issues are exactly the same files being used in uBO for years, and have been used in uBOL as well for over a year with no modification. Given this, it's worrisome what could happen to uBO in the future.

And gorhill notes uBO Lite had a purpose on Firefox, especially on mobile devices:

[T]here were people who preferred the Lite approach of uBOL, which was designed from the ground up to be an efficient suspendable extension, thus a good match for Firefox for Android.

New releases of uBO Lite do not have a Firefox extension; the last version of this coincides with gorhill's message. The Firefox addon page for uBO Lite is also gone.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] erenkoylu@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 days ago

Mozilla has been doing too many shady things recently.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

And the browser experience is getting worse too. So, I’m not sure what our options are for the future. I tolerate the many issues large sites have displaying in Firefox because Firefox is the last holdout against all of this egregious tracking everywhere. But if they’re going to block uBlock, collect a bunch of data by default, and make websites look worse, why am I using it?

[-] CaptSneeze@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I tolerate the many issues large sites have displaying in Firefox because…

With which sites are you seeing these issues? I don’t think I’ve seen Firefox have a problem rendering a website any differently than chromium in many years.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Reddit, Facebook, IRS.gov, and Ticketmaster to name a few. I can’t log in from Firefox on the IRS site and can’t claim tickets on Ticketmaster.

[-] CaptSneeze@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Interesting. I have no problems with either Reddit or Facebook. I can’t comment on either irs.gov or Ticketmaster. I have no history with either.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Issues with those two sites are on Firefox for Android. I chalked it up to them breaking their mobile sites to push their stupid apps, but I got an iPhone a few days ago, and the sites look fine in Safari.

Edit: I’m sure some of it has to do with a combination of my uBlock origin filters, plus my NextDNS config, but I have the same DNS config on this phone, and an Adblock, without issues.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 days ago

My guess is that it was flagged by AI

[-] LWD@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago

That explanation does seem plausible, but Mozilla's emails say the review was performed manually. Either way, the result wasn't great.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago
[-] yahiroz@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

It wouldn't surprise me if even if it was a person reviewing it, they used AI to "help".

[-] kureta@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago

Tired of this AI bullshit creeping into and ruining everything. Unfortunately this is probably just the beginning.

[-] swag_money@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago
[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago
[-] swag_money@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

librewolf or that other browser that's in development, i forget the name

[-] Gingernate@programming.dev 3 points 2 days ago
[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Are you just making words up?

[-] Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago

Ladybird I think

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] AresUII@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

uBO is still available:

[-] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 248 points 4 days ago

I'm convinced that 80% of all these threads and the responses within them are astroturfing by Google to cause everyone to despair that Mozilla is no better than Google and that there will never be anything that could be developed to compete with Google if Mozilla went under.

There's just too goddamn many of them and they're all filled with the same negative comments. It's just like the "no way bro, I love paying for YouTube why you gotta have everything for free bro?" bullshit from a few months ago.

[-] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 10 points 2 days ago

I use to follow a subreddit called /r/degoogle, which was nominally for conversation about how to remove and avoid using google products. ... But I ended up leaving because in pretty much every thread there was a whole lot of posts shitting on any and every suggested alternative, mostly for not being hardcore enough. It was as if the only acceptable approach was to never use any electronic device ever again. Firefox of course was constantly under fire for taking money from Google; which apparently made them worse than Google themselves. ... Anyway, I strongly suspected that people were deliberately trying to destabilize the group so that it couldn't grow or become functional. I had no other explanation for how counter-productive the bulk of the conversations were, and it would certainly be an easy and potentially useful group for pro-google people to target.

I'm less convinced that it is happening here though, but I'm certainly more suspicious of it after that experience with /r/degoogle. I reckon probably why we see a lot of any Mozilla stuff here is just that the audience on Lemmy is very interested in what Mozilla is doing - and negative news always gets more traction than positive news.

[-] Moah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 days ago
  1. who would astro turf on Lemmy?
  2. Google needs Mozilla like Microsoft needed Apple in the 90s
[-] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago
  1. Astroturfing is trivial, they have a dedicated groups of people doing it and they do it everywhere it's their job
  2. Maybe so, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer it if Mozilla got behind Manifest V3
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

as a non google astro turfing shill (you'll have to take my word on this one lmao.)

I kinda get it, 80% of mozillas revenue comes from google? If that monopoly case doesn't kill mozilla, this might.

I could see google trying to pull some shit like this.

[-] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Mozilla doesn't need 80% of its revenue to do a good job of maintaining a browser codebase. So it's a good thing that that funding could disappear, Mozilla could fold like a lawn chair and the next open-source fork that everyone got behind would pick right up and probably do a better job at the core task than Mozilla is.

This idea that open-source software requires more than a dedicated contributing community is (one of many) memes created by the likes of Google and Microsoft in order to snuff out FOSS competition.

i could see that being the case, i would expect it to be the case, but judging by how much the CEO of mozilla gets paid, idk how long that will last...

Although the open source nature of it would be highly beneficial, it might give grounds for google to be a literal monopoly, so maybe that would be productive even. Who knows.

[-] abbenm@lemmy.ml 38 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I've noticed the same thing you have, but I suspect it has a different explanation. I think it's more an echo chamber thing. People have said variations of this for a while now in HN comment threads, on reddit and here. And there's a snowball effect from more people saying it.

But there's been a throughline of bizarrely apathetic and insubstantial low effort comments. That's the one thing that has tied them together, which is why I think they are echo-chambery. Just for one example: one guy just never read a 990 before (a standard nonprofit form), and read Mozilla's and thought it was a conspiracy, and wrote an anti-Mozilla blog post. And then someone linked to that on Lemmy and said it was shady finances. Tons of upvotes.

But I'm convinced that no one reads through these links, including the people posting them. Because it takes two seconds to realize they are nonsense. But it doesn't stop them from getting upvoted.

So my theory is echo chamber.

[-] zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world 39 points 4 days ago

I think it's probably a combination of both. There's an astroturfing campaign going on somewhere, just not on Lemmy, which is overall too small and insignificant to target. But astroturfing works - it creates the echo chambers you're talking about, it creates apathy. Most people just read headlines, not even the comments. You read a bad story about Mozilla once a week and you'll start to internalize it - eventually your opinion of Mozilla will drop, justified or not, to the point where you're willing to believe even the more heinous theories about it.

So you end up with a lot of people who've been fed a lot of misleading half-truths and even some outright lies, who are now getting angry enough about the situation they think is going on to start actively posting anti-Mozilla posts and comments on their own.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] aleats@lemmy.blahaj.zone 267 points 4 days ago

Sometimes you really have to stop and ask yourself what the fuck is going on at Mozilla's HQ. It's insane how they manage to shoot themselves in the foot at least once a week.

[-] sub_ubi@lemmy.ml 76 points 4 days ago
[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 51 points 4 days ago

Yep. What is the likelihood of coincidence when 1) Google's just released manifest V3 2) is cracking down hard on ad blocking 3) is failing hard at being more than a nuisance to ad block users and 4) Mozilla is attacking its most widely used 3rd party feature; the core feature of Google's scorn.

This is why I don't donate money to Firefox. Mozilla, the for-profit corporation, should not exist. It's a parasitic entity that has no value, need, or right to exist. Users should be able to donate to Firefox and vote on specific features, without Mozilla swinging its dick around and ass blasting us all. If donations were transparent and accountable, I'd donate hundreds of dollars a year, for the rest of my life. Because of Mozillas continuous ratfuckery, they get nothing from me. I wonder how true that is for the majority of its user base.

[-] LemmyBe@lemmy.world 44 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I think this is what's happening.

If Google loses appeals, Mozilla (and many other browsers that rely heavily on getting their revenue from Google), will have to find new ways to generate revenue. Unfortunately, they seem to be looking for the easiest way out, and that's selling out their users.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Vincent@feddit.nl 155 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Appears to be a mistake, but needs gorhill to appeal to make the reviewer aware of the mistake and to be able to fix it, which he doesn't feel like doing because he thinks it's unlikely to have been a mistake.

Update: now reversed, but gorhill removed it himself just to not have to deal with the review process and the possibility of human error anymore.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] CynicusRex@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 days ago

And I just installed uBOL on a couple of company employee laptops expecting it to be future-proof. Should've stuck with uBO.

[-] d0ntpan1c@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 3 days ago

Y'all realize a random employee performing the add-on store review process isn't representing Mozilla's or the Firefox teams entire position yeah? This kind of stuff happens all the time with all stores that have review processes.

Firefox Addons store prob needs to improve its process, gorhill is justified in being mad, and I understand if he needs a punching bag between this and google, but, as someone who also develops extensions.... These things happen. It's just a part of building browser extensions.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] jangdonggun@lemmy.ml 27 points 3 days ago

This issue has been solved, it's done and it's gone, there's no needs to bring it back, the uBlockLite developer is happier to not have to maintain UBOL for Firefox honestly, it's a waste of time, there's no reaons to use UBOL when UBO exists.

[-] shasta@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago

Except, you know, the reasons stated above. He didn't just make a lite version for no reason

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Seriously. Why is that comment getting upvoted?

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 54 points 4 days ago

Very cool stuff. Between this and fucking Microsuck Recall it looks like I won't be using the Internet at all in the near future....

Very fun.

Fucking Corpo pricks.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 37 points 4 days ago

TBH, we'd probably all do well to use the internet a little less

[-] DarkGamer@fedia.io 46 points 4 days ago

So much for capitalizing on Chrome's missteps when it comes to ad blocking I guess

load more comments (34 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
442 points (94.2% liked)

Firefox

17302 readers
912 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS