On Tuesday, 13 May, 2014 12:04 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:
So, I installed xul-ext-flashblock (Flashblock 1.5.17 Wheezy) and reset the settings of xul-ext-noscript (NoScript 2.6.8.19) to find out.On 13/05/14 08:07, A Debian User wrote:On Sunday, 11 May, 2014 10:08 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote:On 11/05/14 22:59, Whit Hansell wrote:Am getting frustrated. On the internet today there are so many sites that have taken on so much advertising that it is killing my desire to go to various sites. I mean specifically news sites.<snipped>As a side note, doesn't NoScript and FlashBlock have redundant features, in that they both block the loading of Flash content?No. NoScript does not block Flash by default - you could make it, and likewise with AdBlock Plus, and /etc/hosts. Perhaps it's your use of the term "redundant" that's problematic?So, shouldn't you just use NoScript, since it has more features and additionally does what FlashBlock does, anyway?No. Apples and Oranges. It doesn't. (so, no, again). For empirical evidence go visit Youtube with *just* NoScript enabled and compare the page load speed and totals with NoScript *and* FlashBlock both installed. Kind regards
Comparing the Preferences/Options dialogs of both add-ons, it appears that everything Flashblock can do, NoScript already does* (in addition to all the other things it can do).
These things are:
- block Flash content
- block HTML5 video
- block Silverlight content
- whitelist sites
*There is a minor exception that NoScript allows for the manual import
and export of whitelists, while Flashblock allows you to sync them via
"Weave/Iceweasel Sync". But this is a minor difference and not the
"point" of these programs.
Therefore, in a browser with both Flashblock and NoScript installed, unless you have some special convoluted use case, Flashblock would be "redundant".
It is also technically incorrect that NoScript doesn't block Flash by default. It does. It just whitelists YouTube by default a long with a few other sites. (Flashblock doesn't whitelist anything by default.)
But, so, what's the problem?Each add-on installed contributes a little bit to the browser's startup time, which may all add up to a considerable amount if you have several add-ons installed (like me).
It would be a good idea, then, to limit the number of these add-ons and to forgo installing those add-ons whose functionality can be provided by those already installed.
Also, installing add-ons with similar (or "redundant") functionality might potentially cause these add-ons to mess with each others' functioning, much like what happens when you install two different real-time virus scanners on a certain popular operating system.
In closing, I suggest that the correct way of using your "apples and oranges" analogy would be that Adblock Plus is the apple, NoScript is the orange, and the hosts file is a katana.
Cheers!