[Poll] Why don't you write filters for proxomitron?

[lnminente]

This poll is intended to give the help wich most people needs for writing filters.

Depending in the poll we will be adding usefull links to the following thread:
http://prxbx.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1165

You can vote only for one option, choose the most important reason for you, the vote is anonymous, please vote.

[ProxRocks]

adblock/noscript = "what a crock !!!"...

</two_cents>

[lnminente]

My beginning in proxomitron was for removing ads, i was surfing at theorical 56k...Later i learned we can make the web our way

Sad to say many people don't want more than removing ads[/quote]...

[whenever]

I seldom write filters because with Sidki's filter set I can do most what I want. ;-)

[Graycode]

I've never been able to get a decent grasp of Proxo's filter specifications. I've read up on them many times over the years, yet the light bulb never stays on.

Modifying content to get a desired result without breaking something can be frustrating

[z12]

Personally, I like writing my own filters.
I know what they do, how they work and are easier to maintain.

For the most part, I don't post them as I don't want the hassle of trying to make them compatible with the various filter sets.

Graycode Wrote:Modifying content to get a desired result without breaking something can be frustrating

Well said. But it's also rewarding.

I think it was ProxRocks that said:

Quote:If the page looks right, I didn't filter it enough.

FTW
I'll never forget that, still makes me laugh.

Graycode Wrote:I've read up on them many times over the years, yet the light bulb never stays on.

Sometimes, you have to stop reading and start doing.
Works for me.

z12

[ProxRocks]

(Nov. 29, 2008 11:58 AM)z12 Wrote:  I think it was ProxRocks that said:

Quote:If the page looks right, I didn't filter it enough.

FTW
I'll never forget that, still makes me laugh.

lol.. so, i'm having an impact on the community, eh? :P


FTW = Free the Wookies ???

[z12]

ProxRocks Wrote:FTW = Free the Wookies ???

LOL

FTW: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ftw
Definition #1, no sarcasm intended.

z12

[ProxRocks]

http://www.acronymfinder.com/FTW.html

[lnminente]

z12 Wrote:Personally, I like writing my own filters.
I know what they do, how they work and are easier to maintain.

The same :)

z12 Wrote:For the most part, I don't post them as I don't want the hassle of trying to make them compatible with

the various filter sets.

You don't have to, i don't. Only explaining wich other filters it requires is more than sufficient ;)

Graycode Wrote:Modifying content to get a desired result without breaking something can be frustrating

Here is where it comes firebug and later the techniques to match only the exact text we are looking for. Is very reccomendable the use of $NEST() and $STOP().

For example ($NEST(<a\s,>)&&(*\shref=($AV(\1)*) is safer than <a\s*href=$AV(\1)*>
Not very sure about $NEST(<a\s,*\shref=($AV(\1)*,>)

Later is slower using tests, but you can easily try many modifications to you filters:
$TST(\1=($AV((http|ftp)(s|)://(^\h)*)))))

An example for sources ($NEST(<im(g|age),>)&&(*\ssrc=$AV(\3)*))

I use the \1 for href and \3 for sources. Many times we speak about speed, but a pair of test in every page will not harm anyone and will give you safety. Later when you have tested your filter and you like how it works, then try to reduce the number of tests but maintaining the same safety.

z12 and Proxrocks Wrote:If the page looks right, I didn't filter it enough.
FTW
FTW = Free the Wookies ???

LOL!!!

Def#3: Commonly used among geeks to express their enthusiasm for something

z12, We are less than 6 or 7 here and you still don't consider yourself a geek?? hehehehe ;)

Proxrocks, http://www.acronymfinder.com/CDO.html Chromosome Deletion Outreach, Inc??

[ProxRocks]

(Nov. 29, 2008 02:18 PM)lnminente Wrote:  We are less than 6 or 7

we're quite a bit higher for VISITORS, just not for "contributors"...
that doesn't bother me "too" much, i mean, i "visited" Arnes site as a guest for a good year-and-a-half before i registered and started "contributing"...

Quote:Chromosome Deletion Outreach, Inc??

lol...

[lnminente]

I would increment from 7 adding the number of people wich will vote in this poll...Maybe 70 unique visitors in one day and only two votes? Uff... That's not what i call sharing...

The purpose of this poll was to find what is causing people not contributing (for contributing i mean say hello/thanks al least). Maybe the reason is that they can read us without login, and they don't want to login only to say that...

Could be better don't let guests to read us and explain them how to make their fake cookie for here? Maybe...

Code:

[HTTP headers]
In = FALSE
Out = TRUE
Key = "Cookie: Fake cookie in prxbx.com {ln}081127 (out) WIP"
URL = "prxbx.com/forums/"
Match = "\1"
Replace = "mybbuser=HERE THE BIG STRING; \1"

A call for visitors: If you give no feedback, people will not share their filters!!

[z12]

lnminente Wrote:Is very reccomendable the use of $NEST() and $STOP().

I use $NEST quite a bit. However, it can get confused in scripts.
I've had problems matching tags in js whether it's a $NESTed match or not.
Matching anything in js is a PITA.

For this reason, as a test, I am switching some of my html script matching filters to this:

Code:

<script(\s|>)*</script >

This seems to work better than $NEST on html pages.
Technically, any </ should signify the end of a script on a html page.
In practice, this only seems to hold true when it's a closing script tag.
That's why a closing script tag "inside" html js is always obscured.
Of course, if it's $TYPE(js) page, all matching bets are off.

So far, it's solved some problem matches and not caused any issues.
Time will tell.

z12

[lnminente]

I investigated a lot on this when started doing my config, but I'm not able to give you now a good code to demonstrate it to you and to myself, but depending in byte limit i had problems when no nesting, having the filter matching two scripts once...

<match by filter x>
<script type="text/javascript" src="file1.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="file2.js"></script>
</match>

[Oddysey]

In;

Want my two pesos worth? I'll tell ya.....

Essentially there are two kinds of filter sets, or configurations - one kind has everything in it that will try to do all things for all people, it can be described as very generic in approach. The other kind is specific to a given user only, it does things on a case-by-case basis, the opposite of generic.

Now one might think that a good filter set would be a combination of these two philosophies, and I'd probably agree with him/her. But when a very generic configuration set is published, for use (and modification) by anyone else, then it takes on a life of its own. As ProxRocks has repeatedly pointed out, merely adding one filter that works on its own to a whole filter set (such as sidki's) can be a hair-pulling experience. Or to put it in z12's words, it's a RPITA to try to make a filter for others to use, when you know that such a filter might be incorporated into a popular 'whole configuration set'.

So, have you tested your own filters with sidki's set, or Grypen's, or JD5000's? And not with just the latest version of each of those, but one version back, to take care of the slow-to-upgraders? That's a lot of time and effort, and it still doesn't guarantee 100% perfect operation for everyone, does it? In fact, here's a hot one for ya.... try installing the ancient but still useful JakxPack header filters. Do yours still work? And Kye-u's security filters, do your filters "play nice" with his? Care to take any bets on which filters will be dropped if there's a problem?

Suddenly, writing and publishing a filter, or a whole set of them, just got a mite more intense, didn't it?

I don't harbor any ill will towards an author who publishes a set of generic filters, there are times when such sets are needed, or at least they are useful. But in my own case, and I suspect in the case of many others, being ready and able to block ads from 1000 sites I'll never visit is not what I call the best use of Proxo. Of course, there are some folks who do try to visit as many websites as possible, and for them, such a generic filter set is probably a good thing. Me, I hit maybe 8 or 9 sites a day, and maybe two dozen more a week when searching for something, and that's it. I can cover absolutely all of my "anti-this or that" surfing needs with several specific filters, and a handful of generic ones from Scott's default config.

Are my filters sharable? Yes, of course. Will they do any good for everyone, or at least someone? Possibly, no way to tell for sure. So why don't I publish them? Easy - it's not the 'make it work with sidki' problem, nor any other support issue... it's simply a matter of being asked for a specific need. IOW, if you ask for a Yahoo Mail filter, chances are damned good I'll have what you need. It works only on Yahoo's web-based mail site, meaning that it's very specific - it's not generic by any stretch of the imagination. Which in turn means, it's worthless to everyone who doesn't use Yahoo. So why waste good Forum space by submitting a filter that might be useful to perhaps one or two others, particularly when no one asked for it?

One thing you can be sure of, sharing is good, and it spreads the wealth of knowledge, I'm all for that. But at the same time, I've done nothing 'innovative', all I've done is adapt what I've learned over the years to some specific cases. One might say of my configuration set, "move along folks, nothing to see here", and they'd be correct. The point being, I'm happy with how Proxo works for me, and I'm more than happy to share when asked, but I'm not going to flood the Forum with a bunch of filters that no one else will likely need.

That all adds up to be my 'round-about answer, now let me go back and directly answer your original question "Why don't you write filters for Proxo?" Are you kidding me? Hell, kid, I was writing code for computers when you were still wondering if this was a BJ or the real thing! (ref: Woody Allen's move titled "Everything You Wanted To Know About Sex".) I've contributed my fair share to the lore, all I wanna do now is veg out!! But you didn't make that a poll option, did you?



Oddysey