Google Chrome extensions

Enabling "click to play" has not caused any problems for me on Iron or Chrome.

I like the fact that using this internal mechanism does not add another browser process like Flashblock etc. The same for Iron's internal adblock. For now I'm just using the NotScripts extension along with Iron's adblock and enabling the internal flashblock.

 

No problems with Iron with "Click to play" here on Windows 7 64-bit and different Linux distributions (32-bit and 64-bit).

 

As anyone noticed that the WOT extension stores cookies related to www.mywot.com, even if you have Chromium/Chrome set to block first and third-party cookies?

Is it the web browser itself that allows such, bypassing our settings, so that a user can keep their settings?

 

It was a couple of versions ago (Iron), it is probably fixed now. Iron can be a tad buggy at times though.

I'll have to have another look at it ...

I've used NotScripts on Opera, does it have any setting-up problems on Chrome/Iron?

 

There is a js file that needs to be edited with a password after installation. There is a detailed instruction page that appears in the browser that shows where to edit the file. Once that is done you are set.

 

For the bleeding edge guys:

 

And here's an extension that I "like, you know, so totally" don't need:

http://www.ghacks.net/2011/06/21/like1-for-chrome-combines-live-and-google1-buttons/

 

Search by Image (by Google)
Verified author: chrome.google.com

 

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/24/chrome_paywall_busters/

Before they are taken off?

 

OK thanks.

 

LOL ... yeah take that Murdoch you old (expletive deleted)!

 

Anyone knows how to block video ads on blip.tv (for ex.) with Adblock? I did a search but answers indicate that there isn't a way, so I thought I'd confirm with users here...

 

Chrome extensions can not block flash based video ads.

http://adblockplus.org/en/known-issues-chrome

 

Won't something like Josorek's FlashBlock or this one work?

 

Those are used to block entire Flash elements from websites; allowing blip.tv to load will also allow the ad to be displayed... ABP in FF can block such video ads without blocking the main video.

@Reimer
Thanks for the link.

 

Oh OK. How about FlashControl?

 

Maybe you can do this with NotScripts, i'm not sure. Install the extension, take the time to read the instructions how to set the password and how to change the blocking mode to blacklist and then go to your site, click on the notscripts icon and try to block one by one the related sites until you see no ad (if it can be done ofcourse). I played with it a little bit and blocked fwmrm.net, fbcdn.net and chartbeat.com and currently don't see no ad. I'm not sure though for all this

 

Hi,

Which difference is there between keep my opt-outs and ghostery please ?
I'm using ghostery, does i need to add keep my opt outs ?

Thanks.

 

http://www.darkreading.com/security/privacy/218800199/index.html

 

No need for long quotes.

 

Please how can i add rules for ghostery ? Sometimes all the web-bugs on a page aren't blocked.

 

LMAO what a HORRIBLE article Spoony. I love how they leave the ACTUAL information to the end but they leave all of the scary "omg google is tracking you" right at the front.

Let me summarize it:

1) The only way to get the information is to subpoena it from google and somehow decrypt it.

2) This information is only kept for 2 weeks and then it's wiped.

3) The people who turn off this service are removing a huge security feature for the unlikely possibility of having 2 weeks of their web browsing revealed if the FBI ever thinks they're doing something worth the trouble of a subpoena.

edit: I actually like that site >_>

 

Readability has some other clones, but this is the official one. I'm not interested much in saving online but as a 'reader' (read it now) it does make life a bit easier if you like to read long boring articles online.

 

It could all be resumed to Do not allow cookies?

If no cookie... no tracking? So, why not advice to block cookies and allow them of a per-site basis, instead of advising to disable a security feature?

Anyway... this has nothing to do with extensions

 

I think that I prefer this one.