6 ms·

But the design document only mentions retaining the old API for features that aren't possible with the new API, such as onAuthRequired. So it would still cripp

But the design document only mentions retaining the old API for features that aren't possible with the new API, such as onAuthRequired. So it would still cripple uBlock

edwintorok 8y ago
What if someone would create a pull request to implement unlock origin natively inside chromium, instead of an extension. If such a PR met all technical criteria, would Chromium project accept it?
- berbec 8y ago
  No. Google would not include, as a built-in part of Chromium that is installed by default, a feature to lower their ad revenue.
  - awirth 8y ago
    Doesn't Chromium already lower their revenue from other lacks of integration that are included in Chrome?
    - berbec 8y ago
      Next to no one uses Chromium. The integrations usually start in Chrome, leaving Chromium pure, allowing Opera etc to forge their own path. This is a disturbing trend to change the course of the project, likely due to Edge being based on Chromium.
      - jbigelow76 8y ago
        I bet a decent chunk of the MS engineers lobbied to adopt Gecko instead of Chromium when they decided to move away from EdgeHtml. I wonder what the reasoning was for not going that route, it seems like a huge miss and a total acceptance of a browser monoculture.
        ChrisSD 8y ago
        Gecko is deep in to a transitional phase. Once it comes out the other end it may be simple to embed but it's currently far too early for that. On the other hand Chromium is relatively simple to adapt with many real world examples to learn from. (Personally I think they should stick with EdgeHtml but it seems that ship has sailed).
        dralley 8y ago
        I wish they would have thrown in with the Servo project, but Chromium is ready now and Servo isn't, so I'm sure that factored in.
        fiddlerwoaroof 8y ago
        I wonder how quickly servo could become feature if a major player decided to adopt it.
        addicted 8y ago
        nodeJS uses Chromium and not Gecko. I suspect MS’s requirements basically necessitated the use of Chromium. However, this does provide an opening for MS edge, if MS forks Chromium for Edge and excludes user hostile “features” such as this.
      - sireat 8y ago
        Sadly the only use of Chromium among regular non-tech people is in spyware/malware installations. There is a quite a bit of adware which uses unsigned Chromium to push their wares. That is the malware installs a modified Chromium with all the "extras". So anecdotally, when I see Chromium on a users computer I assume the worst (that I have a cleanup task ahead).
- philliphaydon 8y ago
  Of course not.
- edoceo 8y ago
  Brave browser may be what you are looking for.
  - pmontra 8y ago
    Isn't it also based on Chromium?
    - 18pfsmt 8y ago
      Sure, but this change might cause a hard fork. VC investment in browsers has been a long time coming.
- profalseidol 8y ago
  If you want something like that, get Brave. It's Chromium-based that has privacy and ad-blocking built-in.
  - teknologist 8y ago
    Is there a chance that Google's changes here might disrupt Brave's integration into Chromium? I mean, they might be using this WebRequest API to do their built-in blocking.
- dzhiurgis 8y ago
  I'd love Chromium feature that uses system password manager (macOS / iCloud). On the flip side Chrome's profiles are nice and I wish macOS supported more of it.
DanielRibeiro 8y ago
I really like the point the uBlock maintainer's make: "Extensions act on behalf of users, they add capabilities to a user agent, and deprecating the blocking ability of the webRequest API will essentially decrease the level of user agency in Chromium, to the benefit of web sites which obviously would be happy to have the last word in what resources their pages can fetch/execute/render."
- Mirioron 8y ago
  I'm just waiting for the time until websites won't load at all unless you have hardware DRM turned on that will take all of your control away. >Extensions act on behalf of users, they add capabilities to a user agent, and deprecating the blocking ability of the webRequest API will essentially decrease the level of user agency in Chromium This is off-topic, but I felt the same way about most data privacy problems. It was my own browser that was giving out the information and I would still like to see better control over it by default. Data privacy laws are simply a bandaid that don't help at all against malicious actors.
  - giancarlostoro 8y ago
    > I'm just waiting for the time until websites won't load at all unless you have hardware DRM turned on that will take all of your control away. I already leave websites that become unusable with adblock on, or without it on. It will just trim down on the amount of sites I go on.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - mirimir 8y ago
      Same here. If it's something I'm particularly interested in, I look for a cache, snapshot or whatever. Edit: Or just read HN comments.
      - giancarlostoro 8y ago

But the design document only mentions retaining the old API for features that aren't possible with the new API, such as onAuthRequired. So it would still cripple uBlock

edwintorok 8y ago

What if someone would create a pull request to implement unlock origin natively inside chromium, instead of an extension. If such a PR met all technical criteria, would Chromium project accept it?

berbec 8y ago
No. Google would not include, as a built-in part of Chromium that is installed by default, a feature to lower their ad revenue.
- awirth 8y ago
  Doesn't Chromium already lower their revenue from other lacks of integration that are included in Chrome?
  - berbec 8y ago
    Next to no one uses Chromium. The integrations usually start in Chrome, leaving Chromium pure, allowing Opera etc to forge their own path. This is a disturbing trend to change the course of the project, likely due to Edge being based on Chromium.
    - jbigelow76 8y ago
      I bet a decent chunk of the MS engineers lobbied to adopt Gecko instead of Chromium when they decided to move away from EdgeHtml. I wonder what the reasoning was for not going that route, it seems like a huge miss and a total acceptance of a browser monoculture.
      - ChrisSD 8y ago
        Gecko is deep in to a transitional phase. Once it comes out the other end it may be simple to embed but it's currently far too early for that. On the other hand Chromium is relatively simple to adapt with many real world examples to learn from. (Personally I think they should stick with EdgeHtml but it seems that ship has sailed).
        dralley 8y ago
        I wish they would have thrown in with the Servo project, but Chromium is ready now and Servo isn't, so I'm sure that factored in.
        fiddlerwoaroof 8y ago
        I wonder how quickly servo could become feature if a major player decided to adopt it.
      - addicted 8y ago
        nodeJS uses Chromium and not Gecko. I suspect MS’s requirements basically necessitated the use of Chromium. However, this does provide an opening for MS edge, if MS forks Chromium for Edge and excludes user hostile “features” such as this.
    - sireat 8y ago
      Sadly the only use of Chromium among regular non-tech people is in spyware/malware installations. There is a quite a bit of adware which uses unsigned Chromium to push their wares. That is the malware installs a modified Chromium with all the "extras". So anecdotally, when I see Chromium on a users computer I assume the worst (that I have a cleanup task ahead).
philliphaydon 8y ago
Of course not.
edoceo 8y ago
Brave browser may be what you are looking for.
- pmontra 8y ago
  Isn't it also based on Chromium?
  - 18pfsmt 8y ago
    Sure, but this change might cause a hard fork. VC investment in browsers has been a long time coming.
profalseidol 8y ago
If you want something like that, get Brave. It's Chromium-based that has privacy and ad-blocking built-in.
- teknologist 8y ago
  Is there a chance that Google's changes here might disrupt Brave's integration into Chromium? I mean, they might be using this WebRequest API to do their built-in blocking.
dzhiurgis 8y ago
I'd love Chromium feature that uses system password manager (macOS / iCloud). On the flip side Chrome's profiles are nice and I wish macOS supported more of it.

DanielRibeiro 8y ago

I really like the point the uBlock maintainer's make: "Extensions act on behalf of users, they add capabilities to a user agent, and deprecating the blocking ability of the webRequest API will essentially decrease the level of user agency in Chromium, to the benefit of web sites which obviously would be happy to have the last word in what resources their pages can fetch/execute/render."

Mirioron 8y ago
I'm just waiting for the time until websites won't load at all unless you have hardware DRM turned on that will take all of your control away. >Extensions act on behalf of users, they add capabilities to a user agent, and deprecating the blocking ability of the webRequest API will essentially decrease the level of user agency in Chromium This is off-topic, but I felt the same way about most data privacy problems. It was my own browser that was giving out the information and I would still like to see better control over it by default. Data privacy laws are simply a bandaid that don't help at all against malicious actors.
- giancarlostoro 8y ago
  > I'm just waiting for the time until websites won't load at all unless you have hardware DRM turned on that will take all of your control away. I already leave websites that become unusable with adblock on, or without it on. It will just trim down on the amount of sites I go on.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - mirimir 8y ago
    Same here. If it's something I'm particularly interested in, I look for a cache, snapshot or whatever. Edit: Or just read HN comments.
    - giancarlostoro 8y ago