5 ms·

Google will never be able to pry uBlock Origin from me! Stay away!

PrivWeeble 9y ago
And if Google takes steps to prevent third-party ad blockers from working in Chrome? Or renders them worthless through exceptions to the filtering API? Even if you ignore Google's Funding Choices and its potential to increase adoption of view-ads-or-pay (a lose/lose for privacy, btw) you are very vulnerable if you use Chrome and/or a Google controlled OS. The Coalition for Better Ads won't be helping you by keeping Google in check. It is more or less the same companies you are fighting right now (check membership and note NAI, IAB, DMA, and other trade associations).
- saiya-jin 9y ago
  mozilla.firefox.
- lostcolony 9y ago
  Hello again Firefox
  - Nereus77 9y ago
    You mean Waterfox, of course?
- mnx 9y ago
  Would it be hard to maintain a minimal fork, with enough changes to allow an adblocker, and nothing else changed? I would pay a couple bucks for that.
wand3r 9y ago
Me neither BUT I am optimistic about this. If ads become better, horrifying ones get blocked and most users have blocking we will see some great things: - non-technical users with safer and better experience - better revenue models / more innovative businesses that are based on actual sales - better uBlock experience because ads are not incentivized to be horrible Also, the problem is less adverts than tracking which is fed by this. Obviously companies like FB and Google still will but hopefully tracking relaxes either by the awareness this causes driving a change in user behavior AND defunds some of the tracking as businesses shift to dif Models. I won't stop filtering and blocking, but I would love the experience to be better, safer, and faster. If the main advert company, Google, does something about this we will be better off. Nontech users will definitely be.
rtkwe 9y ago
Sure and there'll be tons of die hards like you who won't stop using blockers. This still makes a lot of sense if it keeps new people from installing a 3rd party blanket ad blocker and eating into ad revenue from Google's own platform.
- ggggtez 9y ago
  Based on the article, I didn't see any evidence they are shutting down chrome add-ons. I'm really lost on why people are getting the impression of that. When Google made Google+, they didn't block you from visiting Facebook, why would this be different
  - smichel17 9y ago
    Google already has a history of banning extensions and apps. For example, ad blockers are against the Google Play ToS.
  - rtkwe 9y ago
    By 'keeps' I didn't mean Google would programmatically block ad blockers but remove enough of the annoying ads that people wouldn't think using a total blocker is necessary.

And if Google takes steps to prevent third-party ad blockers from working in Chrome? Or renders them worthless through exceptions to the filtering API? Even if you ignore Google's Funding Choices and its potential to increase adoption of view-ads-or-pay (a lose/lose for privacy, btw) you are very vulnerable if you use Chrome and/or a Google controlled OS. The Coalition for Better Ads won't be helping you by keeping Google in check. It is more or less the same companies you are fighting right now (check membership and note NAI, IAB, DMA, and other trade associations).

saiya-jin 9y ago
mozilla.firefox.
lostcolony 9y ago
Hello again Firefox
- Nereus77 9y ago
  You mean Waterfox, of course?
mnx 9y ago
Would it be hard to maintain a minimal fork, with enough changes to allow an adblocker, and nothing else changed? I would pay a couple bucks for that.

wand3r 9y ago

Me neither BUT I am optimistic about this. If ads become better, horrifying ones get blocked and most users have blocking we will see some great things: - non-technical users with safer and better experience - better revenue models / more innovative businesses that are based on actual sales - better uBlock experience because ads are not incentivized to be horrible Also, the problem is less adverts than tracking which is fed by this. Obviously companies like FB and Google still will but hopefully tracking relaxes either by the awareness this causes driving a change in user behavior AND defunds some of the tracking as businesses shift to dif Models. I won't stop filtering and blocking, but I would love the experience to be better, safer, and faster. If the main advert company, Google, does something about this we will be better off. Nontech users will definitely be.

rtkwe 9y ago

Sure and there'll be tons of die hards like you who won't stop using blockers. This still makes a lot of sense if it keeps new people from installing a 3rd party blanket ad blocker and eating into ad revenue from Google's own platform.

ggggtez 9y ago
Based on the article, I didn't see any evidence they are shutting down chrome add-ons. I'm really lost on why people are getting the impression of that. When Google made Google+, they didn't block you from visiting Facebook, why would this be different
- smichel17 9y ago
  Google already has a history of banning extensions and apps. For example, ad blockers are against the Google Play ToS.
- rtkwe 9y ago
  By 'keeps' I didn't mean Google would programmatically block ad blockers but remove enough of the annoying ads that people wouldn't think using a total blocker is necessary.