- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- tech@pawb.social
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- tech@pawb.social
You must log in or register to comment.
I’ll just stick with Firefox, thanks.
Sure - but this isn’t just about chrome extensions. There’s a (good) movement towards standardised browser extensions that work in all browsers and all the major browsers (including Chrome/FireFox) are on board with that.
So, Chrome allowing ad blockers to function properly is good news for everyone. We don’t want to go back to a world where every browser needs a different ad blocker.
deleted by creator
1000% disagree. The web, for example, would never exist if it was limited to a single browser - regardless of wether that browser was open source or proprietary, it has only been as successful as it is because it’s an open standard.
Web Extensions are finally going the same way - https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/blob/main/charter.md — there have been attempts do this in the past, but they never worked. It is working this time and Chrome’s stance on ad blocking is a direct threat to that.
deleted by creator
It was quite the Wild West with early browsers. Different browsers could interpret the same site in different ways. Some browser added their own functionality as they wished. There were no strict standards. Web developers didn’t exactly follow the W3C standards either. And then you could always do it in a Flash or Java applet if browsers didn’t support what you wanted.
This was also the time with the most diverse set of browsers. Today the web standards are much more formalized and more strictly followed, and ironically this is also the time where almost everybody use different flavors of Chrome.
It’s a trap, this is all bad. standerlise the internet, and then they’l be able to charge you for Xbox live ons team and more
LibreWolf is great as well, it’s Firefox on steroids. It has many privacy and security improvements, it removes crap like Pocket and Sponsored sites and it comes with uBlock Origin pre-installed. The closest thing on Android is Mull, I’ve been using these as my main browsers for quite some time and I’m extremely happy. Soon Firefox (and Mull) on Android will become even better when full support for extensions will be rolled out.
Cool. So they’ll launch it “loose” and then tighten it. We all know the playbook by now.
I’m glad you actually said that scrolling down the comment I was like, wait people are ok with this? and they don’t see that it’s a trap?
Here’s the ELI 5 version.
Under the current system, a browser extension like an ad blocker can request that some or all of a web page code get piped through the extension so the extension can filter or change it however it wants. This is extremely helpful for ad blockers, as they will locate and remove advertising code. However, according to Google, it has also led to privacy violations and malicious extensions inserting hostile code into people’s web pages.Under manifest V3, an extension cannot directly filter the web page code. It can submit filters to the browser and the browser itself will conduct the filtering. However the number of filters that may be implemented is significantly lower. In earlier proposals, it would be a few thousand, whereas a default configuration of U-block Origin can have tens or hundreds of thousands of filter entries.
They are now increasing the number of allowed filters and hoping it makes people happy.
However, many (including myself) will still oppose this because it limits filtering to the methods implemented by the browser. Future extensions cannot develop their own filtering engines or more intelligent adaptive filtering algorithms. And I believe it’s still allows the browser to stop filtering for performance reasons, something many users including myself won’t want. I’d rather the web page load slowly and ad-free.
Reminds me of when Firefox migrated to the Chrome style extension format (forgot what it’s called), the old ones could change literally anything in FF and the new ones are limited by the APIs that Mozilla create. Yes the newer extensions are safer and don’t crash the browser but don’t have the same feature set as the original to this day.
I think the obvious issue here is what is the actual purpose of the company driving the change, the engineers might be alright but the company… Can’t trust Google with this.
I remember that. Firefox back then had gotten kind of bloated and was pretty slow, goddamn it was customizable. Then Chrome came out and the reason to use Chrome was it was bare bones but lightning fast.
My basic answer is can’t trust Google with anything. Maybe at one point you could, but not today. They should have kept ‘don’t be evil’ as their motto…
This was the final straw for me. I will no longer have Chromium-based browsers on any system I own.
I don’t blame you
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Google has shared an updated timeline about Manifest V3, the latest version of its Chrome extension specification that has faced criticism for putting limits on ad blockers.
After putting the update on pause last year, Google announced on Thursday it will continue the transition to Manifest V3 with some key changes.
Google previously proposed putting restrictions on the functionality of this API for security reasons, potentially impacting the effectiveness of ad-blockers across all Chromium-based browsers, including Chrome, Microsoft Edge, and Firefox.
In a post published earlier this month, Meshkov says the changes should allow ad blockers to “offer nearly the same quality of filtering that they demonstrated with Manifest V2.” However, Alexei Miagkov, the senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, tells The Verge Manifest V3 still puts unnecessary limitations on developers.
Despite this small olive branch Google appears to be extending to ad-blockers, the company hasn’t been so friendly to those types of extensions as of late.
YouTube launched a global crackdown on ad-blockers last month that prevents some users from watching videos with the extensions turned on.
The original article contains 322 words, the summary contains 180 words. Saved 44%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is not a good thing for Linux users, but it is for Windows users. It’l make using the internet for basic tasks more seamless. and I think this is generally what this is going for. Not to make it seamless, but to restrict, but make it seem seamless.
