5 ms·
As the Tampermonkey devs put it: > Every little userscript would then have to become an own extension. Anyone who wants to do that has to pay $5 to be able to
by jasonhansel 5y ago
As the Tampermonkey devs put it:
> Every little userscript would then have to become an own extension. Anyone who wants to do that has to pay $5 to be able to publish an extension.
So this seems like a good way for Google to make money...and to exert more control by moderating the contents of userscripts.
- holistio 5y agoIs that the right way to look at it? I don't believe this can ever scale to an amount that is even visible to Google.
- dannyw 5y agoThe right way to look at it is that Google wants to maintain control over the web, and remove the ability for user-agents to do anything that threatens their bottom line (i.e. ability to block ads). Manifest v3's proposed content blocking is hilariously crippled, that Google can simply start generating random class IDs and there's no way for uBlock origin to block ads anymore.
- shadowgovt 5y agoYou don't have to publish an extension to side-load it.
- contriban 5y agoEven by poorest-country standards, a one-time $5 is pretty reasonable. It's basically only a minimal deterrent against unlimited generations of bots. Now compare that to what Apple charges