- cross-posted to:
- google@lemdro.id
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- hackernews@lemmy.smeargle.fans
Google ramps up its campaign against ad blockers on Chrome.
You must log in or register to comment.
I remember how excited I was when google released a browser. They’ve become such a joke since then.
I have a copy backed up, works fine when loaded manually
Why wouldn’t you just use something like Firefox? Why the actual fuck would you opt to continue using Chrome?
I stripped it from all google crap, extra features, etc. Then the features I want I added in using an extension I wrote and maintain myself
Why would you use a browser like firefox when you could use brave which has built in ad blocks which firefox has not
Because ublock origin is like 2 clicks and doesn’t need a cryptobro chromium browser
I prefer to have a “cryptobro” chromium browser that not only supports five html and js features but is actually leading in html 5 support and not lacking 2 years behind
I’ll just say it.
People that continue to use chrome, and all of its little forks like Brave and Edge, are the reason why corpos are winning and making the internet worse off in the long run.
I’ve been using Firefox since I was a kid 20 FUCKING YEARS AGO. Not ONCE have I went to another browser for anything, and I look shit up constantly, pay my bills through Firefox, and everything between the two.
Stop making excuses, and just use ANYTHING other than fucking CHROME. I don’t care if it’s safari, ladybird, or fucking internet explorer. Just stop using a browser that is built by an ad company masquerading as a fucking tech company.
Jesus.
The transition to the Manifest V3 framework means extensions like uBlock Origin can’t use remotely hosted code. According to Google, it “presents security risks by allowing unreviewed code to be executed in extensions.” The new policy changes will only allow an extension to execute JavaScript as part of its package.
Is this a badly worded paragraph, but is uBlock Origin really using remotely hosted code? I thought it was a different restriction in manifest V3 that stops as blockers being effective.
Is this a badly worded paragraph, but is uBlock Origin really using remotely hosted code? I thought it was a different restriction in manifest V3 that stops as blockers being effective.
I think it kinda is badly worded, and it refers to code/data that is dynamically loaded by an extension, after it’s installed by the user, which uBlock Origin does use for filter lists. They can’t be bundled with the extension, because they get out of date really quickly and often need to get updated, so uBlock Origin just downloads a new blocklist and saves it in its cache. MV3 wants to prohibit this, making adblockers almost useless. Updating the extension every time there is an update to one of uBlock’s many blocklists just isn’t feasible. I think they can also hold back updates to the extension in the Chrome Web Store, which they might to if a blocklist starts to include something Google doesn’t like (e.g. YouTube ads). All of this is just a shitshow and people should switch to better browsers with actual API compatibility for purposes like adblocking. The best examples are Firefox and LibreWolf.
I think Google might just be calling block lists “externally hosted code”. As I understand it, there are several restrictions: the severe limitation on the number of rules, the requirement to bundle rules with the addon (and the associated delay due to extension store review), and the loss of many advanced rule types that change blocking behavior based on different factors in order to avoid detection and otherwise be effective.
The ublock FAQ has some interesting details too: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3