Technology

59419 readers

4966 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

2072

uBlock Origin developer recommends switching to Firefox as Chrome flags the extension (github.com)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world

275 comments fedilink hide all child comments

~~https://www.neowin.net/news/ublock-origin-developer-recommends-switching-to-ublock-lite-as-chrome-flags-the-extension/~~

EDIT: Apologies. Updated with a link to what gorhill REALLY said:

Manifest v2 uBO will not be automatically replaced by Manifest v3 uBOL[ight]. uBOL is too different from uBO for it to silently replace uBO -- you will have to explicitly make a choice as to which extension should replace uBO according to your own prerogatives.

Ultimately whether uBOL is an acceptable alternative to uBO is up to you, it's not a choice that will be made for you.

Will development of uBO continue? Yes, there are other browsers which are not deprecating Manifest v2, e.g. Firefox.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] pyrflie@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago (8 children)

[deleted]

[–] Raxiel@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (7 children)

Because their maiden name is Judge Fasbuk?

[+] pyrflie@lemm.ee -15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (6 children)

[deleted]

[–] Raxiel@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

One of Googles biggest competitor's is the company "Meta" which is phonetically similar to the judges name. The previous commentator made a joke where they appeared to confuse the corporation for the person. A situation that would be absurd if true, and from there the humour arose.
When a respondent (you) appeared to miss the subtext in the comment, and took it at face value, I made a post where I gave the impression I had made the same mistake , and suggested that the judge had previously had a name phonetically similar to "Facebook" which was the name previously used by the corporation now called "Meta".

Such a situation would require a coincidence even more implausible and absurd than the first, and was intended to demonstrate that neither comment should be taken seriously.

Your comment indicates you either failed to identify the absurdity, possibly due to confirmation bias following your previous response. Or you are attempting to "up the ante" by erroneously taking such absurdity seriously for further humourous effect. Your follow up comments elsewhere suggest the former.

Regardless, the "joke" has now been thoroughly killed by way of explanation. You can choose to accept the explanation or choose to remain in error.

load more comments (5 replies)