5 ms·

Don't forget the main feature, it won't let you block those pesky ads!

staticassertion 7y ago
AFAIK the new proposal allows dynamic filtering, which addresses the primary concern with adblocking tools like uBlock, I believe. > The Declarative Net Request API now allows for the registration and removal of dynamic rules - specified at runtime rather than statically in the manifest. We’ve also added the capability to remove common tracking headers, such as Referer, Cookie, and Set-Cookie. https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarative-net-request.html https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarativ... My opinion though is that if you were going to switch over this, just switch anyway.
- ac29 7y ago
  There is a limit of 30k rules though, which isn't enough to contain even uBO's defaults. While it looks like they are moving to a 150k global limit, even that is less than my current uBO setup of over 200k.
  - viraptor 7y ago
    They can work around that by concatenating multiple checks into a single rule though, right?
  - staticassertion 7y ago
    But the article addresses this by saying that the vast majority of rules never get used?
- danShumway 7y ago
  No, as far as I can tell Gorhill's position on the policy hasn't changed since dynamic filtering was introduced. The primary concern isn't that rules can't be modified, it's that they're declarative -- meaning developers can only use filtering schemes that Google explicitly supports. It's inaccurate to say that the revised v3 addresses all API concerns.
  - staticassertion 7y ago
    Oh, ok. I really wasn't sure.
mda 7y ago
It is not implemented, and ad blocking still works. Also they recently announced more changes to the proposal. To be fair they have some good reasons to change existing api. World is not ending yet.
untog 7y ago
Their new proposal for blocking ads is exactly the same as the idea Apple offers with Safari, and it blocks ads just fine.
- Asooka 7y ago
  There was a very big thread about this, it's nothing like Apple. The limits are much smaller on the amount of things you can put in a blocklist.
  - lern_too_spel 7y ago
    Even if they end up implementing Apple-style simple blocking, they said at the beginning that they would adjust the limits. Most recently, they said the limit would be 150k, which is three times the number Apple allows. https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarative-net-request.html?m=1 https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarativ...
  - untog 7y ago
    So it's actually a lot like Apple, just with different limits?
- woodruffw 7y ago
  Emphasis on idea; IIRC, previous threads have pointed out that Apple hasn't put a limit on their API, or has made the limit much larger.
- danShumway 7y ago
  UBlock Origin, UMatrix, Privacy Badger, Decentraleyes, and HTTPS Everywhere are all not available on Safari, in part because the APIs they rely on aren't available. I'm not sure why people make the claim that Safari is just as good at blocking ads as Firefox and Chrome. It's not. The extension options on Safari are comparatively quite limited, in no small part because of technical decisions like this.
  - y_molodtsov 7y ago
rdm_blackhole 7y ago
Maybe I should have added the /s at the end of my comment. I am aware that the change to the webRequest API has not been implemented yet. However, I just could not resist having a bit of fun when I saw this headline. And yes, I actually did switch to FF in light of this announcement from Google. I actually tried to switch a few times in the past but never really had the motivation to do so. Google gave me the motivation, so I guess, thanks Google!
amanzi 7y ago
I'm interested to see how this will affect other browsers built off the Chromium source code, e.g. new Edge, Brave, Opera, etc
- selectodude 7y ago
  Brave and Opera have said they're going to fork and add back the API to allow true adblocking.
  - ChrisGranger 7y ago
    Vivaldi has mentioned this possibility as well. https://vivaldi.com/blog/chromium-ad-blockers-choice/ https://vivaldi.com/blog/chromium-ad-blockers-choice/

AFAIK the new proposal allows dynamic filtering, which addresses the primary concern with adblocking tools like uBlock, I believe. > The Declarative Net Request API now allows for the registration and removal of dynamic rules - specified at runtime rather than statically in the manifest. We’ve also added the capability to remove common tracking headers, such as Referer, Cookie, and Set-Cookie. https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarative-net-request.html https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarativ... My opinion though is that if you were going to switch over this, just switch anyway.

ac29 7y ago
There is a limit of 30k rules though, which isn't enough to contain even uBO's defaults. While it looks like they are moving to a 150k global limit, even that is less than my current uBO setup of over 200k.
- viraptor 7y ago
  They can work around that by concatenating multiple checks into a single rule though, right?
- staticassertion 7y ago
  But the article addresses this by saying that the vast majority of rules never get used?
danShumway 7y ago
No, as far as I can tell Gorhill's position on the policy hasn't changed since dynamic filtering was introduced. The primary concern isn't that rules can't be modified, it's that they're declarative -- meaning developers can only use filtering schemes that Google explicitly supports. It's inaccurate to say that the revised v3 addresses all API concerns.
- staticassertion 7y ago
  Oh, ok. I really wasn't sure.

mda 7y ago

It is not implemented, and ad blocking still works. Also they recently announced more changes to the proposal. To be fair they have some good reasons to change existing api. World is not ending yet.

untog 7y ago

Their new proposal for blocking ads is exactly the same as the idea Apple offers with Safari, and it blocks ads just fine.

Asooka 7y ago
There was a very big thread about this, it's nothing like Apple. The limits are much smaller on the amount of things you can put in a blocklist.
- lern_too_spel 7y ago
  Even if they end up implementing Apple-style simple blocking, they said at the beginning that they would adjust the limits. Most recently, they said the limit would be 150k, which is three times the number Apple allows. https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarative-net-request.html?m=1 https://blog.chromium.org/2019/06/web-request-and-declarativ...
- untog 7y ago
  So it's actually a lot like Apple, just with different limits?
woodruffw 7y ago
Emphasis on idea; IIRC, previous threads have pointed out that Apple hasn't put a limit on their API, or has made the limit much larger.
danShumway 7y ago
UBlock Origin, UMatrix, Privacy Badger, Decentraleyes, and HTTPS Everywhere are all not available on Safari, in part because the APIs they rely on aren't available. I'm not sure why people make the claim that Safari is just as good at blocking ads as Firefox and Chrome. It's not. The extension options on Safari are comparatively quite limited, in no small part because of technical decisions like this.
- y_molodtsov 7y ago

rdm_blackhole 7y ago

Maybe I should have added the /s at the end of my comment. I am aware that the change to the webRequest API has not been implemented yet. However, I just could not resist having a bit of fun when I saw this headline. And yes, I actually did switch to FF in light of this announcement from Google. I actually tried to switch a few times in the past but never really had the motivation to do so. Google gave me the motivation, so I guess, thanks Google!

amanzi 7y ago

I'm interested to see how this will affect other browsers built off the Chromium source code, e.g. new Edge, Brave, Opera, etc

selectodude 7y ago
Brave and Opera have said they're going to fork and add back the API to allow true adblocking.
- ChrisGranger 7y ago
  Vivaldi has mentioned this possibility as well. https://vivaldi.com/blog/chromium-ad-blockers-choice/ https://vivaldi.com/blog/chromium-ad-blockers-choice/