• WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    24 hours 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

    • Björn@swg-empire.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Rust is faster than JavaScript

      isn’t ublock’s filtering compiled to webassembly?

      The slow thing usually is the DOM manipulation anyways.

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours 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.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        18 hours ago

        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.

        my point is not actually about search providers, but more generally websites intentionally breaking support for gecko based browsers. waterfox itself is too little, most developers don’t even know about it I think. but firefox is the flagship/reference gecko browser, with more of a measurable number of users. if they implement a good ad blocker in the base browser, that could discourage advertising related sites from serving/supporting this browser.

        brave is different in that it uses chromium, which the sites just happen to support already because of chrome. but firefox support is often not a priority even today

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      especially using a brave adblocker, which i noticed doesnt block most ads, and likely whitelists some of them.

    • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

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

      They should have built it in years ago, but called it “web security filtering” or something and included only a basic security blocklist, but left it easy to add other lists.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        still it wasn’t blocking ads, and even I as a poweruser was not aware that I could add externally maintained ad blocklists