Raymond Hill

Fixed in Firefox 90: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1705523

@ghajini In that case it would be fair to state that the extension helps defusing anti-blocker mechanisms on AdFly-related sites without having to enumerate all of them.

Just force an update of "uBlock filters", there was a bad filter in it, fixed hours ago.

@Lucent The change in uBO causing the issue was caused by a [relatively recent change](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/commit/76ef4811a3d1d41974b1c2449459ccced63a71e4#diff-35c32f641b370cba4a5f06018c904c27241756164dfd317fa7c5698aec08c448), it did not exist back in December 2019.

Declined. You are seriously changing the current behavior of uBO for millions of users. Furtehrmore, It's not _always_ desirable to always use the base domain.

I re-open to give some thought to this, I can't remember where but this was brought in the past that it should be possible to set the local scope to...

I can't make exceptions for user filters, one single generic cosmetic filter would cause all the expected benefits from using this setting to completely disappear -- it takes only one...

I just had an idea how uBO could disabling DOM surveying while allowing user's own generic cosmetic filters: to simply just inject them all unconditionally. The worry though is that...

> Go to a page that has video for which uBlock filters prevent the video from playing. For example: http://www.nytimes.com/video Videos play fine here without having to disable uBO.

I don't think this should be committed to the code base, this should be [added to the wiki](https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/wiki/Deploying-uBlock-Origin). Also, it does not feel right to change uBO's code base to...