I use uBlock Origin and disable all the Firefox stuff, no need for two. And now that they are using shit from Brave, I will disable that crap from a horrid company.
this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
60 points (96.9% liked)
Technology
84043 readers
9021 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- 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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
it's an open source component built on the same system as ublock. it's good for firefox that they add stuff people actually want.
They could just have easily built in the ublock origin plugin and not gone with braves implementation, a browser that is plagued with justified scandal.
Why Firefox would tie its fate to its disgraced founder is beyond me.
...because he also founded firefox?
i guess they receive some cash to distribute brave malware
Is there any benefit to this over ublock origin?
it's a lot faster since it's not built with js. less customisable though, since there's no ui, although i imagine they're working on that.
To add to this: Waterfox has promised to implement a UI even if Mozilla doesn't.
More generic and therefore worse for fingerprinting. Though that’s only because it’s built in and standardized.
Is there any value in redundancy?
no, but no harm either. they use the same lists so one of them will just be doing nothing whenever the other removes something.