9 ms·

If Chrome can kill uBlock and use its dominance to do user-hostile stuff, and Firefox goes along "in the interest of cross-browser compatibility", then what the

If Chrome can kill uBlock and use its dominance to do user-hostile stuff, and Firefox goes along "in the interest of cross-browser compatibility", then what the hell's the point of Firefox in the first place?

pkulak 5y ago
My assumption is that Firefox will be implementing the standard, but not the restrictions. Am I wrong there?
- amelius 5y ago
  Firefox also implemented DRM.
  - pkulak 5y ago
    I needed them to do that so I could watch Netflix. Debate it all you want, but it made my life measurably better and I'm glad they did it. This would only negatively effect me (and everyone else).
    - danuker 5y ago
      How is your life measurably better, by comparing it with other people's fake and perfect and amazing lives (in Netflix videos)?
      - Spivak 5y ago
        Because some people don’t find digital DVD rentals to be an affront to their freedom and just want to watch Squidgame?
      - handrous 5y ago
        > other people's fake and perfect and amazing lives Uh, if that's what we're supposed to be using movie and TV streaming services for, I've been watching precisely the wrong things. Seems more like a description of social media & (not unrelatedly) advertising. Or maybe porn.
      - contravariant 5y ago
        You can tell this argument is flawed because it applies to all forms of video.
        danuker 5y ago
        It does apply to all forms of video. But that does not make it flawed. What makes it flawed is the cultural norm of watching video.
      - tomjen3 5y ago
        That would be Insta, not Netflix where you are watching interesting/awesome stories.
  - ok_dad 5y ago
    DRM doesn't limit anything for the user except for some video content. The day DRM prevents doing things to requests and such, like Manifext v3 does, then I will care. Right now, I'm happy to be able to watch One Punch Man on my laptop.
- prox 5y ago
  I really hope so. Any good sources to find out Mozilla’s stance?
  - mirashii 5y ago
    https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-update/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-updat... > We will support blocking webRequest until there’s a better solution which covers all use cases we consider important, since DNR as currently implemented by Chrome does not yet meet the needs of extension developers.
    - tentacleuno 5y ago
      It would certainly be interesting they implemented blocking webRequest (just to keep compatibility with Chrome) and then added a Firefox-specific API for blocking web requests.
- kreetx 5y ago
  I'd guess even if Firefox did keep extensions unrestricted then slowly they would die away - given how much smaller the user base will be. We need some new power to emerge in this space.
  - danuker 5y ago
    I believe they would gain users from Chrome, where you won't be able to block ads anymore.
    - dariusj18 5y ago
      I would certainly stop using Chrome
      - skinkestek 5y ago
        Just do it today :-) I often have a month or more long streak between every time I have to use Ch#%!e ;-) Bonus point for devs: If it works in Firefox it usually works everywhere since Firefox had always been reasonably standard compliant.
        ddingus 5y ago
        Right. I really need to finish my move off chrome. I get started, and then... Thanks for saying this.
  - bee_rider 5y ago
    If Firefox keeps full extension capability, as a superset of Chrome's gimped implementation, then extension developers can decide how they want to handle the incompatibility. I don't really get how the extension ecosystem works anyway -- extension developers are usually just sharing something they use to be helpful/make a point, and then some tack on donations thing, right? Since nobody is doing this to get rich I suspect they won't chase marketshare.
  - NewEntryHN 5y ago
    There is surely a bias between users of extensions of uBlock Origin and users of Firefox. The userbase is still smaller, but maybe not enough to completely throw away development.
- mkl 5y ago
  You are pretty much right. There's no need for assumptions though, see https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-update/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-updat... and https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/09/03/mozillas-manifest-v3-faq/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/09/03/mozillas-manifest....
  - iggldiggl 5y ago
    There are some rumblings as to whether background pages will or will not be removed in Firefox, too, though…
ynth7 5y ago
I think you mean “what open web?” Back to IRC DCC style sharing and distributed computing with VPN No need to follow the money to do interesting engineering and computing. Interesting is subjective and wrapping a white paper in the cruft to host it as a service in the cloud isn’t interesting engineering Part of me wonders if the chip shortage is real or just a way to hide big corp hoovering them up for DC hosted services.
tomjen3 5y ago
If they do that, it will be forked.
- NewEntryHN 5y ago
  Firefox has already been forked multiple times because of decisions from Mozilla, see [Pale Moon](https://www.palemoon.org/ https://www.palemoon.org/) or [Waterfox](https://www.waterfox.net/ https://www.waterfox.net/). Few people use those forks, for the simple reason that what has been removed from Firefox is not game-changing enough to mandate an exodus. However I agree that removing support for uBlock Origin will surely be another story.
  - celdon25 5y ago
    Just wanted to leave a reminder here that low user count does not necessarily imply low utility. The goal of a fork isn't to become the next monopoly.
  - skinkestek 5y ago
    > Few people use those forks, for the simple reason that what has been removed from Firefox is not game-changing enough to mandate an exodus. This is not the reason for me at least to not use it as my main browser. I recently tested and the speed is good and it is absolutely wonderful to have true full fledged extensions and complete themes. My reason is that I'm worried if their security is good enough. If we could somehow be sure about that I'd actually happily leave modern Firefox behind for it. Personally I'm hoping for someone to create a patch set and bulld binaries based on it to re-enable the old stuff, not by letting extensions muck around in the internals but by providing defined extensions points like: - enable / disable tab bar - provide your own tab rendering code - etc
matheusmoreira 5y ago
They should probably just special case uBlock Origin at this point. It's too important an extension to allow it to be limited.
- josefx 5y ago
  Are you sure you don't want to hard code the original "uBlock" instead of the "Origin" fork while you are at it? It already had a perfectly fine hostile takeover in the past, no need to wait for a new one.

pkulak 5y ago

My assumption is that Firefox will be implementing the standard, but not the restrictions. Am I wrong there?

amelius 5y ago
Firefox also implemented DRM.
- pkulak 5y ago
  I needed them to do that so I could watch Netflix. Debate it all you want, but it made my life measurably better and I'm glad they did it. This would only negatively effect me (and everyone else).
  - danuker 5y ago
    How is your life measurably better, by comparing it with other people's fake and perfect and amazing lives (in Netflix videos)?
    - Spivak 5y ago
      Because some people don’t find digital DVD rentals to be an affront to their freedom and just want to watch Squidgame?
    - handrous 5y ago
      > other people's fake and perfect and amazing lives Uh, if that's what we're supposed to be using movie and TV streaming services for, I've been watching precisely the wrong things. Seems more like a description of social media & (not unrelatedly) advertising. Or maybe porn.
    - contravariant 5y ago
      You can tell this argument is flawed because it applies to all forms of video.
      - danuker 5y ago
        It does apply to all forms of video. But that does not make it flawed. What makes it flawed is the cultural norm of watching video.
    - tomjen3 5y ago
      That would be Insta, not Netflix where you are watching interesting/awesome stories.
- ok_dad 5y ago
  DRM doesn't limit anything for the user except for some video content. The day DRM prevents doing things to requests and such, like Manifext v3 does, then I will care. Right now, I'm happy to be able to watch One Punch Man on my laptop.
prox 5y ago
I really hope so. Any good sources to find out Mozilla’s stance?
- mirashii 5y ago
  https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-update/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-updat... > We will support blocking webRequest until there’s a better solution which covers all use cases we consider important, since DNR as currently implemented by Chrome does not yet meet the needs of extension developers.
  - tentacleuno 5y ago
    It would certainly be interesting they implemented blocking webRequest (just to keep compatibility with Chrome) and then added a Firefox-specific API for blocking web requests.
kreetx 5y ago
I'd guess even if Firefox did keep extensions unrestricted then slowly they would die away - given how much smaller the user base will be. We need some new power to emerge in this space.
- danuker 5y ago
  I believe they would gain users from Chrome, where you won't be able to block ads anymore.
  - dariusj18 5y ago
    I would certainly stop using Chrome
    - skinkestek 5y ago
      Just do it today :-) I often have a month or more long streak between every time I have to use Ch#%!e ;-) Bonus point for devs: If it works in Firefox it usually works everywhere since Firefox had always been reasonably standard compliant.
      - ddingus 5y ago
        Right. I really need to finish my move off chrome. I get started, and then... Thanks for saying this.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  If Firefox keeps full extension capability, as a superset of Chrome's gimped implementation, then extension developers can decide how they want to handle the incompatibility. I don't really get how the extension ecosystem works anyway -- extension developers are usually just sharing something they use to be helpful/make a point, and then some tack on donations thing, right? Since nobody is doing this to get rich I suspect they won't chase marketshare.
- NewEntryHN 5y ago
  There is surely a bias between users of extensions of uBlock Origin and users of Firefox. The userbase is still smaller, but maybe not enough to completely throw away development.
mkl 5y ago
You are pretty much right. There's no need for assumptions though, see https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-update/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-updat... and https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/09/03/mozillas-manifest-v3-faq/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2019/09/03/mozillas-manifest....
- iggldiggl 5y ago
  There are some rumblings as to whether background pages will or will not be removed in Firefox, too, though…

ynth7 5y ago

I think you mean “what open web?” Back to IRC DCC style sharing and distributed computing with VPN No need to follow the money to do interesting engineering and computing. Interesting is subjective and wrapping a white paper in the cruft to host it as a service in the cloud isn’t interesting engineering Part of me wonders if the chip shortage is real or just a way to hide big corp hoovering them up for DC hosted services.

tomjen3 5y ago

If they do that, it will be forked.

NewEntryHN 5y ago
Firefox has already been forked multiple times because of decisions from Mozilla, see [Pale Moon](https://www.palemoon.org/ https://www.palemoon.org/) or [Waterfox](https://www.waterfox.net/ https://www.waterfox.net/). Few people use those forks, for the simple reason that what has been removed from Firefox is not game-changing enough to mandate an exodus. However I agree that removing support for uBlock Origin will surely be another story.
- celdon25 5y ago
  Just wanted to leave a reminder here that low user count does not necessarily imply low utility. The goal of a fork isn't to become the next monopoly.
- skinkestek 5y ago
  > Few people use those forks, for the simple reason that what has been removed from Firefox is not game-changing enough to mandate an exodus. This is not the reason for me at least to not use it as my main browser. I recently tested and the speed is good and it is absolutely wonderful to have true full fledged extensions and complete themes. My reason is that I'm worried if their security is good enough. If we could somehow be sure about that I'd actually happily leave modern Firefox behind for it. Personally I'm hoping for someone to create a patch set and bulld binaries based on it to re-enable the old stuff, not by letting extensions muck around in the internals but by providing defined extensions points like: - enable / disable tab bar - provide your own tab rendering code - etc

matheusmoreira 5y ago

They should probably just special case uBlock Origin at this point. It's too important an extension to allow it to be limited.

josefx 5y ago
Are you sure you don't want to hard code the original "uBlock" instead of the "Origin" fork while you are at it? It already had a perfectly fine hostile takeover in the past, no need to wait for a new one.