Ad Muncher: Remove social buttons.

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by JeffreyCole, Jan 15, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JeffreyCole

    JeffreyCole Developer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Posts:
    433

    Attached Files:

  2. JeffreyCole

    JeffreyCole Developer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Posts:
    433
    That's the entire purpose of this thread.

    I don't block social stuff by default since many users consider it legit content.

    I'm waiting on feedback from you guys to remove any social stuff.

    That is the ONLY reason it's not removed yet.
     
  3. JeffreyCole

    JeffreyCole Developer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Posts:
    433
    Ad Muncher can and will block it all.

    You don't need anything else.

    I just started this social list so of course it's not 100% yet.

    I need more reports from users like you so I can remove it all.
     
  4. Bodhitree

    Bodhitree Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Posts:
    567
    I am seeing sites all over starting to be fixed now, we are making progress - this thread is working out nicely. I started messing with Adblock+filters, and found browsing started to slow - dramatically. As in pages were taking twice as long.. Once disabled, w/AM running only, they loaded fast again. So I think 'stacking' defenses is probably a bit harsh on browsing speed, and potentially unnecessary. One thing I tested was Fanboy-Annoyances w/AM, and Fanboy really slowed down page-loads so I ditched it, and will continue to report so this .dat can capture everything eventually.

    Note, AM kills the scrolling sidebar on this page, but leaves giant social buttons.
    http://www.minecraft-schematics.com/

    Fanboy Annoyances kills both, so they are probably common resources.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2013
  5. JeffreyCole

    JeffreyCole Developer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Posts:
    433
    I personally believe that removing too little is better than removing too much.

    The actual social buttons, that track you and contact 3rd parties and use javascript to slow down your page loading are completely removed from that page.

    What is left is 4 links that are hosted on that local site, present zero privacy or security issue. While still allowing a user to click on them if they wish to share or visit the social page for the the site they are on.

    I believe this is the best way to handle it. :)
     
  6. Bodhitree

    Bodhitree Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Posts:
    567
  7. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    The Annoyances list will kill a LOT of stuff. But, you need to watch out at times because depending on what a user might ask to get specifically blocked for their use, might end up not being good for your use. I've not seen a slowdown unless, as I warned, you're loading up on lists or using lists that have too many duplicate entries. The Annoyances list and the Anti-Social list block a lot of the same stuff, so I'd just stick with one or the other. The normal Fanboy list is a tad slow, because it has gotten rather fat and, as I said, often there is the issue of duplicate entries that takes a while for the maintainers to get straightened out. If you use any normal ad lists with ABP again, stick to EasyList and EasyPrivacy. They are a bit lighter and better maintained, and the Fanboy lists are getting merged with them anyway since Fanboy can no longer maintain all of his lists and is shutting down his forum sometime soon.
     
  8. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    You don't understand, I'm not referring really to social buttons and trackers, I'm referring to trackers in general, which are in far, far greater number than the social trackers and some of which will slow down websites that AM or any ad blocker tries to block them on. Trackers are also much harder to report since they aren't visible like social buttons or ads. Sure, you can look at the bottom of your screen and watch the URLs of the various scripts load, but they aren't always trackers and unless you've seen them before or research every URL, you're not going to know whether they are or not. I'm not criticizing AM or you, I'm only discussing with fellow users that AM doesn't know everything (and can't), and users can only report on what they see. Tracker blocking is a much different beast than ad blocking, and sometimes other companies might have seen a tracker that you haven't, or ABP hasn't, and so on. Using an extra layer on top of AM isn't being unfair or distrusting of AM, it's just covering more bases.

    Edit: P.S, get some free time, lol. I read you're doing this 12+ hours a day? Take a breather dude :D
     
  9. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    IDK, that one extra layer always happens to screw things here. That's why I'm sticking with ADB+ with Fanboy (and maybe replace that with AdMuncher in the future). Whenever I add Ghostery to Opera, for example, random site functionality breaks after some time.
     
  10. Bodhitree

    Bodhitree Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Posts:
    567
    AM blocks trackers, test it.. Enable DNTME, hit a site, click on the tracker, write down the names. Disable DNTME, enable AM, clear the logs, hit the same sites and compare the trackers with the ones written down that DNTME blocked. You will find that AM blocks all of those, and sometimes more. This is an easy experiment, and I have already done it for several sites.

    AM doesn't require stacking of other things, and I do not believe it does after testing many of these things. Also AM nails web bugs and other exploits, which ABP won't even touch.

    Browsing speed is much higher with AM than it is with ABP/DNTME stuff enabled. Easy to test.. Put page load timers on your browser and examine load times with various configurations.. To my surprise, pages loaded TWICE as fast with AM vs those other products.. Not kidding.
     
  11. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,741
    Location:
    UK
  12. Bodhitree

    Bodhitree Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Posts:
    567
    Those appear to be just links.
     
  13. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,741
    Location:
    UK
    So, if I understand correctly, we're leaving such links alone even if they look like buttons?
     
  14. JeffreyCole

    JeffreyCole Developer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Posts:
    433
    The goal is to actually remove the 3rd party connection and bloated javascript of social widgets and buttons.

    That's what I did on that page. :)

    It loads much faster now without any tracking or 3rd party scripts running.

    All that's lift are innocuous links to facebook and twitter for those who DO want to click them.

    This leaves it up to the user. :)
     
  15. pegas

    pegas Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2008
    Posts:
    2,369
    Hi Jeff,

    Following our yesterday's discussion via your IRC channel I randomly have tested today AM against Ghostery and have concluded that AM blocks all if not more than Ghostery. Hence I uninstalled Ghostery from Opera and I will keep AM alone. Thanks to your yesterday's in-depth explanation which provoked me to perform the said tests I know now that AM is really enough and the most efficient solution in blocking of all the mess ;)
     
  16. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    ...Not so much. Between ABP plus DNT and AM, there was less than a second of difference, both coming in at about 2.83 seconds for Cracked.com Without anything at all, I was well north of 3 seconds, nearing 4. Look you've got to finally understand your individual results don't matter. I may experience differently from you, the guy down the street may experience differently than both of us. It can't be to your surprise that pages load faster, because you've been touting it all along. Anyway, what really needs to be shown is not who does it better, but that some sort of filter is needed period.
     
  17. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    An extra layer in ad-blocking, just like in security always runs that risk. At best you end up with bloat, at worst you end up destroying the pages you're viewing because the lists got a bit overzealous. Ghostery and Opera issues could just be Ghostery, or it could Opera and its rendering issues. I haven't used Ghostery since they edged more towards the advertisers side and away from the users. DNT has been my go-to, but on Opera that isn't possible.
     
  18. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,113
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    Not in my experience. Admuncher (including social list) loads exactly the same speed as ABP when you use the equivalent lists (e.g. Fanboy ultimate). That is measured using page load timers. YMMV....
     
  19. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America

    Yep, same experience here. They're both good tools and it really doesn't matter which one you use (leaving marketing out of this) as long as it works for your situation.
     
  20. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,113
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    Well, actually I find Admuncher vastly superior to ABP+fanboy ultimate :)
    ABP + fanboy (or even easylist) breaks too many site functions for me / damages page layouts too easily, and doesn't offer the control that Admuncher does. ABP is ok for a free solution, but it's no Admuncher :) Again though, ymmv....
     
  21. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    I'd never call it "vastly" superior to ABP, though there is less chance of a boatload of duplicate entries and Jeffrey does all he can to make sure things don't break instead of "Oh, want this blocked? No problem!" without seeing what effect it has on various websites. Again both tools work. If you don't want to spend the cash there is a free alternative (I only paid because of the sale that was going on quite honestly) that works well enough for most people (A few million users are doubtfully wrong). AM also might have issues with other filtering applications such as AV web scanners/blockers like MBAM or Avast. I wouldn't think anyone in their right mind would disable security applications for an ad-blocker, there's no way I would nor will but hey, to each their own. Anyway, back to social button issues :)
     
  22. Bodhitree

    Bodhitree Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Posts:
    567
    Agreed.

    HOWEVER.. If you install ABP as default, as the vast majority of users do, then run tests, Admuncher is far far superior for speed. I am not factoring additional lists, ultimates, annoyances or anything else. As default, because that is the way 99% of the people that use it will experience it. Very easy to test, run page-load timers with ABP(default), and AM(default), and you will find a significant speed increase with AM. I have done this over and over on clean snapshots, and the result is always the same. Granted, the results might trim down closer if you start adding additional lists, but I find additional lists can break pages, and seemingly add to browser instability.

    So for the vast majority of people, AM will actually improve browsing speed - significantly. Even over free solutions. I tested this - extensively - because I wanted to validate the product before purchase, I don't buy anything because someone claims something. Tests proved, it does significantly increase browsing speed over ABP(default), and most other solutions (Adfender, Adguard, etc). I think AM can add exclusions for AVs, can't it? I don't have any issue with Bullguard2013(Commtouch Filtering) and AM, so I am not worried about it. But Avast clearly has issues with it, but I don't like Avast anyway so that's fine.
     
  23. Cudni

    Cudni Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Posts:
    6,956
    Location:
    Somethingshire
    ot posts removed.
     
  24. Bodhitree

    Bodhitree Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Posts:
    567
  25. JeffreyCole

    JeffreyCole Developer

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Posts:
    433
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.