This just makes me worried to rely on uBO but more because what if the author just fucks off because someone else pissed them off.
That is very concerning to me, also.
Large parts of the internet relying on one or two tiny one-man FOSS projects? (UBO and ADguard are often cited as the only two reliable-ish and safe adblockers)
If he can’t be bothered with that nonsense, how secure is UBO’s future? How secure is the future of adblocking?
I would bet that advertising companies are rubbing their hands now and planning to ramp up pressure against these poor devs.
I know looking at it from the outside can look like throwing a fit, but as a software dev I can assure you our professional life is a constellation of papercuts and stumbling blocks on the best days. It is a fun job in many ways but it’s by its nature extremely frustrating at times. For professionals, the inherent frustrations are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, the rest of the iceberg being induced frustrations due to work environment causes of various nature, and a lot of devs who also develop stuff in their own free time do it to regain a sense of purpose and control.
If these kinda hiccups keep happening even outside the day job of a developer, it is absolutely understandable that the reaction is simply to cut the bullshit rather than grabbing yet another shovel to shovel away the shit you’ve been covered with this time.
Ultimately, the cost benefit analysis for keeping uBOL hosted on mozilla’s platform became skewed on the cost side and the additional expense is not one that gorhill can or wants to afford.
It would seem that the ubo lite version was made specifically to cater to chrome and manifest v3 if I’m not mistaken…
In the end the author may have just felt it was too much energy keeping a pared down chrome version on Firefox when the full version is present and working. Especially after this particular drama.
Mozilla can’t be trusted to host the addon, so the author is taking on the responsibility of hosting it himself. How is that his fault and not Mozilla’s?
Whether Mozilla acted out of malice or incompetence is irrelevant. The report was false and the findings were incorrect, they have to be held responsible either way.
I’d much rather have them be overzealous and mistakenly block an addon for a few hours, than have them be too lax and approve addons actually stealing data.
Mozilla did apologize, said they were wrong and said they’d correct the issue. The author refused and decided not to put it back to AMO. At that points its on the author that it’s not AMO.
Promises from a for-profit company don’t mean shit. How many times have you seen the “we’ve heard you and we’ll do better next time” routine, only for next time to be the same or worse? They’d promise you the pissing Sun if it meant more dollar signs.
They’re empty words. No company will put out a statement saying “we fucked up, we’re sorry, it’s going to happen again”. Until Mozilla can prove through actions that the issue is fixed, Hill is correct in distrusting them.
This is such a storm in a teacup. Someone making the manual checks at Mozilla fucked up and the situation was quickly admitted. I don’t know what else to wish, other than that the failure wouldn’t have happened in the first place. Sucks that it did. Now what sucks is that gorhill doesn’t want to do put it back but it is what it is, luckily it was just the Lite version.
While I like a juicy conspiracy and fuck the sytsems and all, I don’t think they were lying when they said that they’d put the addon back if gorhill just resubmitted it.
The article also seems to say that he didn’t bother to disprove the mistaken findings and so Mozilla might’ve not even heard anything back until it blew up. The whole thing seems to have happened pretty quickly.
Yeah, I know. If I was in a sensible mood this AM, I probably wouldn’t have started this chain. But if you look back to my first comment, I did say it was probably a coincidence.
Things always change in the world. Case in point being Lemmy and Federation.
Whatever comes after uBO will never be like the same old thing, but we just keep on going forward and fondly remember the nice things we used to have, thanking those that worked tirelessly so we could enjoy those nice things.
This is a peaceful but not the best approach. Though we should always respect and thank the developers, we (if possible) shouldn’t just let things be replaced with worse alternatives all the time.
They made an error and quickly corrected. It’s the addon author who threw a fit and removed the addon.
This just makes me worried to rely on uBO but more because what if the author just fucks off because someone else pissed them off.
That is very concerning to me, also.
Large parts of the internet relying on one or two tiny one-man FOSS projects? (UBO and ADguard are often cited as the only two reliable-ish and safe adblockers)
If he can’t be bothered with that nonsense, how secure is UBO’s future? How secure is the future of adblocking?
I would bet that advertising companies are rubbing their hands now and planning to ramp up pressure against these poor devs.
I know looking at it from the outside can look like throwing a fit, but as a software dev I can assure you our professional life is a constellation of papercuts and stumbling blocks on the best days. It is a fun job in many ways but it’s by its nature extremely frustrating at times. For professionals, the inherent frustrations are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, the rest of the iceberg being induced frustrations due to work environment causes of various nature, and a lot of devs who also develop stuff in their own free time do it to regain a sense of purpose and control.
If these kinda hiccups keep happening even outside the day job of a developer, it is absolutely understandable that the reaction is simply to cut the bullshit rather than grabbing yet another shovel to shovel away the shit you’ve been covered with this time.
Ultimately, the cost benefit analysis for keeping uBOL hosted on mozilla’s platform became skewed on the cost side and the additional expense is not one that gorhill can or wants to afford.
So, yeah, it’s not a hissy fit.
I don’t think throwing a fit and it being a hissy fit are the same thing.
It would seem that the ubo lite version was made specifically to cater to chrome and manifest v3 if I’m not mistaken…
In the end the author may have just felt it was too much energy keeping a pared down chrome version on Firefox when the full version is present and working. Especially after this particular drama.
Some say the Lite one was good for mobile since it was lighter weight but I didn’t notice a difference tbh.
Indeed I’m using ubo full on my nothing 2a, and it feels like nothing at all.
Another nothinger! How’s the 2a? Sorry, I know it’s off topic, just curious.
Mozilla can’t be trusted to host the addon, so the author is taking on the responsibility of hosting it himself. How is that his fault and not Mozilla’s?
Whether Mozilla acted out of malice or incompetence is irrelevant. The report was false and the findings were incorrect, they have to be held responsible either way.
I’d much rather have them be overzealous and mistakenly block an addon for a few hours, than have them be too lax and approve addons actually stealing data.
They also removed all previous versions except a very old one with known issues, thus exposing people to more danger than necessary in any way.
Mozilla did apologize, said they were wrong and said they’d correct the issue. The author refused and decided not to put it back to AMO. At that points its on the author that it’s not AMO.
Promises from a for-profit company don’t mean shit. How many times have you seen the “we’ve heard you and we’ll do better next time” routine, only for next time to be the same or worse? They’d promise you the pissing Sun if it meant more dollar signs.
They’re empty words. No company will put out a statement saying “we fucked up, we’re sorry, it’s going to happen again”. Until Mozilla can prove through actions that the issue is fixed, Hill is correct in distrusting them.
This is such a storm in a teacup. Someone making the manual checks at Mozilla fucked up and the situation was quickly admitted. I don’t know what else to wish, other than that the failure wouldn’t have happened in the first place. Sucks that it did. Now what sucks is that gorhill doesn’t want to do put it back but it is what it is, luckily it was just the Lite version.
While I like a juicy conspiracy and fuck the sytsems and all, I don’t think they were lying when they said that they’d put the addon back if gorhill just resubmitted it.
As the article says, only when it blew up. But you’re right, the author doesn’t look good either.
More honestly, I enjoy a good conspiracy theory with my coffee.
The article also seems to say that he didn’t bother to disprove the mistaken findings and so Mozilla might’ve not even heard anything back until it blew up. The whole thing seems to have happened pretty quickly.
Yeah, I know. If I was in a sensible mood this AM, I probably wouldn’t have started this chain. But if you look back to my first comment, I did say it was probably a coincidence.
…are we pretending your original comment wasn’t sarcastic?
I think they had reasons to act how they acted. They’re probably on a lot of pressure because the whole tech world is fighting ad blocking now.
There’s always some reason. I’m just worried that something happens with uBO and same happens there
Things always change in the world. Case in point being Lemmy and Federation. Whatever comes after uBO will never be like the same old thing, but we just keep on going forward and fondly remember the nice things we used to have, thanking those that worked tirelessly so we could enjoy those nice things.
This is a peaceful but not the best approach. Though we should always respect and thank the developers, we (if possible) shouldn’t just let things be replaced with worse alternatives all the time.