better version of: https://lemmy.world/post/21210097
<3
Consent-o-matic instead of cookies and adnausem instead of ublock origin.
Consent-o-matic will actively opt out of popups.
Adnausem is built on top of ublock origin and will silently “click” on the ads behind the scenes to mess up your advertising profile and cost the advertisers money.
What’s wrong with privacy badger?
Not OP, but what puts me off is that it calls itself badger, but really it’s just a software that has nothing in common with those glorious animals. Did you know that badgers’ keen sense of smell is about 800 times sharper than our own?
Did you know that badgers keep their homes in tip-top shape by creating a latrine pit as a bathroom? They won’t defecate in their homes, instead making a pit out of dried grass and leaves just outside their burrow.
Privacy Badger has historically allowed tracking until it successfully identifies a domain as a likely tracker. Like the air bags going off after you’ve already wrapped your car around a telephone pole. But it’s now been changed and is now closer to a list-based tracker blocker (enumerate badness):
They’ve since corrected one of the core issues with PB by doing so, but it still it is very weak. To see why, please glance through The Six Dumbest Ideas in Computer Security.
uBlock Origin in advanced mode, with default-deny rules (only allow assets by exception) is going to be much stronger at blocking crap.
Personally, I use uMatrix with pretty much all asset classes blocked by default. I never see popups. I never see banners begging “please allow our cookies, pleeeeaaase!”.
Need to add a pihole to that stack
Why is Badger bad?
It’s not bad, just mostly redundant these days, as the heuristic features are no longer enabled, and the defaults ublock lists will cover a lot of the same.
the return dislike plugin is just stupid. it’s a community database now, so rather than being based on the actual number of dislikes on youtube it’s based on the dislikes of the people who have the plugin.
it used to be that it actually got the real numbers but youtube removed that endpoint so now it’s just a misanthropic echo chamber.
It’s better than nothing. Also I’d probably weigh the opinion of people who have the extension higher than of those who don’t.
Is it? personally, when i think of “people who want to see the dislike bar” my mind equates that to “people who want to dislike”, and that’s not a group of people i want to interact with.
To me it wrings more of "people who want to know before they waste 20 minutes whether this video is clickbait, just actually false, rightwing conspiracy theories, or has some massive editing flaw that makes the video pointless.
It’s honestly relatively representative afaik
Even though it, SponsorBlock etc. could just be neglected by using piped or just federated alternatives.
how can we even know that though? there’s no stats anymore.
also, if peertube et al got bigger, surely sponsorblock would be useful there as well? if creators would use those services because people were on them, sponsors would contact those creators because they got the views.
What an awful mischaracterisation. While the dislike feature may appeal to misanthropes, it also appeals to the much larger pool of people that are intelligent enough/respectful of their own time to understand the value of the feature in helping to avoid poor quality and misleading content.
It really bears out in the results. For those who recall what old ratios looked like, for sufficiently popular videos, they still hold true with this plugin.
How so? Like/dislike ratios are a very quick and effective means of identifying problematic content. Clickbait titles and thumbnails are another issue - they aren’t a reasonable indicator of the quality of the content. It’s an emerging trend in an oversaturated environment in which even creators of high quality content feel the need to partake.
