NotHereToPlayGames

Correct! I do not auto update and leave an older version ON PURPOSE. As far as I am concerned, the only ONLY ONLY reason to ever upgrade from a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" version is because the older version is now broken. We uBlock Origin users have a common flaw! That flaw is that uBlock does not publish the actual LISTS that it uses! Most are published by Adblock Plus and that results in ERRORS when designed-for-ABP lists are used by uBO. Each and every one of us has a method to *track* those ERRORS - ie, click on the "eyeball" and open the List Asset Viewer. These 19 Errors, for example, is from uBlock 1.62.0 in Chromium v131 with an updated-just-now list. That list also has *ERRORS* in uBlock 1.52.2 in Chromium v122 - but it is my ONLY list with ERRORS in 1.52.2 whereas 1.62.0 has SEVERAL lists with errors! I run 14 lists here at home. I do jump through the hoops to make sure that those lists are working well with each other. EasyList Cookie Notices, as one example, has an ERROR when ran on uBO 1.62.0 but does not have an error when ran on uBO 1.52.2, same EXACT list used in both, errors in newest, does not error in older. I could list other lists also. But that example "teaches you how to fish" so you can start feeding yourself. Newer is not always better!

All true. I'm not running a 20-30yr old computer so my computer is fast enough to not be concerned with the effect of 3 extensions doing the work of 1. That is an ENTIRELY different matter then a web browser's "naked benchmarks" (ie, no extensions) indicating a performance baseline. I think you are now beginning to see why this thread (and others like it) never gain any traction. What I have works for me, not you. What you have works for you, not me. What person C has works for person C, but not you or me.

Did you install 1.53.0 from the Chrome Web Store (or similar)? If so, I submit that that is why (assuming you do not use UNGOOGLED CHROMIUM as that is technically the only Chrome/Chromium Fork that truly breaks the line-of-communication with Chrome Web Store). I think Brave does also, but I've never actually used Brave. Another "trick" is to MODIFY the extension before installing. Extensions have a 32-digit "checksum". It is the numbers you see after chrome-extension:// in the address bar whenever you go to an extension's settings/options. By repacking the extension then installing from your repack but just adding your own "notes.txt" file, as an example, YOU CHANGE THE CHECKSUM and now even Chrome Web Store won't even recognize what it is!

This is your hobby/obsession, not mine. No way in Hades will I install PB. Nothing against PB, per se. But I *never* install *any* extension without scouring through its source code and I have no interest in scouring PB's source code. I cite Tampermonkey as an example. I had it scoured and modified LONG before I ever started using it. And look what using it "as-is" did to anybody that tried to use it in Supermium (assuming you follow those discussions as well). PB "used to" be in the tech-news quite a bit for violating privacy in order to protect privacy. Though I have not seen it in *recent* tech-news, so that reference is a bit dated (unsure of how dated, months or years, no clue).

Yep. As I previously stated, Router config (which includes DNS blocking!) + DNS hosts file is the first line of defense, above and beyond any extension or Proxomitron-like app.

Plus, it seems to me that your latest is revealing that uBlock *does not work by itself* and REQUIRES you to use Privacy Badger in conjunction with uBlock in order to meet your needs. The same goes here! uBlock does not meet my needs by itself. Using it alongside uMatrix DOES meet my needs.

Technically true. But not for the way in which I use them uBlock is for public lists only, no "my rules". uMatrix is "my rules" only, no public lists. uMatrix is intentionally set to BLOCK *ALL* third-party connections. *ALL* of them. This works 1,000,000% for me. Not claiming it to be "for everyone". Me using uBlock + uMatrix is no different than you using uBlock + Privacy Badger. You have a "use" for Privacy Badger (I think you've also used Ghostery), I do not! "To each their own." That's why this topic hasn't gained much traction. Everybody has what works for them. People "hear" uBlock + uMatrix and make assumptions on "how" I couple them with each other, et cetera. Again, "works for me, not claiming it to be 'for everyone'".

The trackers are blocked in my config NOT by relying on uBlock lists alone but by uBlock lists in addition to uMatrix blocking *ALL* third-party *crap*. In the case of your mediaite example, no trackers are allowed on my end. BUT if I want to actually watch the video, I have to manually enable uMatrix's block of YouTube. Which is the way that I want it - block all CRAP until I manually intervene and decide MANUALLY to unblock.

After a 22/23 Year Run, I think I will be abandoning Proxomitron/Proxomitron Reborn. "It's been a good run." While I still consider it to be THE Swiss Army Knife for every web browser because it DOES EVERYTHING in ONE PROGRAM, it's just become "easier" to not rely on ONE PROGRAM doing the job of uBlock, uMatrix, Stylus, and Tampermonkey! But rather to rely on the GUIs of uBlock, uMatrix, Stylus, and Tampermonkey to all do "their thing" instead. I'll call it a trial period for now, as there are a TON of things that I relied on Proxomitron "for" that I will miss big time, but that should also be able to ported over to uBlock, uMatrix, Stylus, or Tampermonkey. I know that one thing I am going to miss MOST OF ALL is how I used Proxomitron to kill "timers". When I am logged into my credit card or checking account and "reconciling" my statements, I will miss my Proxomitron allowing me to sit "idle" on a web page for an HOUR if I feel like it taking that long but the web site NOT LOGGING ME OUT, no matter how long I sit "idle". Granted, I realize that "kids" nowadays don't even know what "reconciling" a bank statement even is, lol.

<excerpt from Reuters> Risks include "the possibility that the Chinese government could use (TikTok) to control data collection on millions of users or control the recommendation algorithm, which could be used for influence operations," Wray told U.S. lawmakers. <excerpt> Which came first, the chicken or the egg? To me, it all boils down to DATA COLLECTION. The algorithm and the influence is DEFINED by the DATA COLLECTION. Without the DATA, there is no INFLUENCING. Data Collection violates Privacy Rights. So to me, the bottom denominator is the privacy rights. But agreed - "potatoe, potato"...

An oldie but goodie -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5rYfZtAI88

<not worth it> </not>

While "semantically" true, you may be surprised at just how much of an overlap there is between the two "classifications".

I should add that I have never witnessed a "speed decrease" by having 'too many' lists! Here at work, I use 9 lists. Our company firewall, for only God Knows, blocks any-and-all AdGuard lists! At home, I add 5 lists (for a total of 14!), all five at home that can not be used here at work are AdGuard lists.

Not sure "where you're going" with the question. I myself would rather have a "list" of 500,000 than a list of 100,000 even if my browsing habits only ever "triggers" 10,000 of the 100,000. "To each their own."

Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1299771/tiktok-global-user-age-distribution/

To me, an "ad" and a "tracker" is one in the same. The problem with ad blockers is that the REQUEST for the ad has ALREADY BEEN MADE if your extension/list is blocking it, so that request is a "tracker". The advertiser doesn't need for you to "see" the ad for them to compile databases and statistics and marketing and demographics and whatever else.

lol, oh good grief

I would submit that the actual extension being used is less important than the combination of "lists" that are used. Especially when several "lists" overlap multiple extensions. Pick a list and there are DOZENS of extensions that "use" that list.

Other. Router config + DNS hosts file + Proxomitron Reborn + uBlock Origin + uMatrix + Stylus + Tampermonkey A couple of my YouTube extensions also "block ads", but the ads never make it past my other defenses for them to even perform a block (and the extension's ad-block functionality is too often broken by YouTube "updates"). They all work hand-in-hand to block ads.

Yep, that's what I use also (I referred to it as "Classic Shell" previously, but it is indeed called "Open-Shell"). But that is now "off-topic". The original post was not in the StartIsBack section whereas it is now.

I agree. But look at the userbase! The userbase here in the USA is already migrating to Red Note - which is also based in China. The USERBASE of TikTok (I have a 24yr old daughter on TikTok) couldn't even tell you who our Vice President is! Let alone "care" about political underpinnings of their "beloved" source of what they call "influencers". The USERBASE is "smart enough" to see their "feeds" as influencers, their terminology, but not smart enough to connect the dotted line between "influence" and "brain-washed censored mind-control propaganda".

I am not TikTok fan. Or Instagram or Facebook or X or *anything* classified as "social". But this "ban" is USELESS. Why? Because everybody that uses it DOES NOT CARE about "privacy rights" and don't beleive that they (the users) are being manipulated like puppets, indoctrinated, mind control, whatever label you want to give it. Most have just moved on to Red Note which I predict will become FAR more "popular" than TikTok ever was. Tell a kid not to touch the cookies because they just came out of the oven and they are hot, they WILL touch it and get burned. People on TikTok DO NOT CARE about "privacy rights". Same goes for Instagram. Same goes for Facebook. Same goes for X. You name it. We have peope here at MSFN that tend to be even on the paranoid spectrum of privacy, yet they have Insagram or Facebook or X accounts. Adults sell their souls every day and claim one thing while do another. Do we really think "teens" on TikTok are any different? They learn from us, afterall. And if "privacy" was really an issue, Facebook would have died out two decades ago.

Yes and no. You cannot restore on YOUR view of a chat that you deleted. You can UNHIDE a chat that you hid on your end. Deleting on your end does not delete from the recipient IF THEY HAVE ALREADY READ IT. Plus, your employer KEEPS ALL OF THEM, regardless of who did the sending and who did the receiving. Bottom line, coupled with your other post regarding Teams, if you went "postal", you're screwed!

Your employer/IT should completely disable your ability to log into Teams. All of the discussions within Teams are technically the property of your employer and the employee cannot request they be deleted.