Ad networks are a high traffic way to spread malware. I would never recommend disabling a blocker, especially on commerce sites.

Usually checkout pages don't have pesky ads galore, or any. But such a page usually has a ton of anti-bot scripts, such as captchas and other privacy-invading checks.

Ad blockers usually block such stuff, for a good reason. But I don't mind it on a checkout page specifically though, because on a checkout page I wilfully disclose a ton of my private details, such as name, address, etc.

Good checkout pages work well with an ad blocker on.

If I go buy something and it requires me to disable my adblocker or my VPN I just look for another place to buy.

Yep, I absolutely will not play these stupid games with retailers. If you want my business, don't expose me to malware.

Local shops don't generally expose you to malware.

The big deal was allegedly these small shops exposed you to viruses, but Walmart, Kroger, and Lowes did not.

Make it make sense.

Yeah, I had large corporations in mind.

>I use Firefox + uBlock Origin

Wasn’t Mozilla accused of selling data they collected from Firefox users?

Correct me if I’m wrong.

Even with all the drama Firefox is still an excellent browser, definitely better for privacy and uBlock than Chrome.

They removed wording in their FAQ saying that they wouldn't sell data. It's a subtle distinction, and may or may not make a difference depending on your perspective.

Zen, LibreWolf, and Waterfox are privacy minded Firefox forks.

It was overblown.

It's just the paradox of when you present yourself as "the good guys" - people will hold you extra accountable for things that others easily get away with as nobody expects them to do better.

Unfortunately, Mozilla tends to shoot themselves in their foot this way somewhat often.

Being the good guys is the only reason anyone still uses Firefox. If Mozilla doesn't want to be the good guys, we'll use one of their many forks that remove the bad guy code.