4 ms·

I could be very wrong about this, and yes, it's also mostly wishful thinking, but my guess is Chrome will have to walk back V3 at some point. The reasoning is t

by bambax 5y ago

I could be very wrong about this, and yes, it's also mostly wishful thinking, but my guess is Chrome will have to walk back V3 at some point. The reasoning is that V3 makes uBlock Origin impossible, and Chrome without uBlock (or any browser really) is unusable. So maybe you can just wait? Although it may take a long time. Also, FF said in May of last year (2021) that they would start accepting V3 extensions in "early 2022" [0] but I don't know if they have kept their schedule. [0] https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-update/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2021/05/27/manifest-v3-updat...

falafelite 5y ago
Ah okay thanks for sharing the Mozilla update. And I suppose I am less optimistic than you, since they have so much browser market share I’d guess they’re happy to let devs figure out how to make our stuff work if we want access to their users. It’s also notable that so far v3 is only mandated for new extensions, though I’m not sure if that applies to updates of existing extensions.
- jaredsohn 5y ago
  It applies to updates of existing extensions in January 2023. https://developer.chrome.com/blog/mv2-transition/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/mv2-transition/
freedomben 5y ago
I hope you're right. You're certainly right in my case: I will switch completely to FF when that happens. I was an early adopter of Chrome and while I do use FF quite a bit as my "work" profile, breaking extensions that make the web usable will cause me to leave and never look back (unless you are rate and the walk back v3)
pvity 5y ago
[dead]
catlifeonmars 5y ago
> Chrome without uBlock (or any browser really) is unusable. Source? If this is anecdotal, it seems unlikely that it’s representative.
- OptionX 5y ago
  It's axiomatic based on its self-evident nature.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - catlifeonmars 5y ago
    Can you clarify? What is self evident? Plenty of people use Chrome without blockers. Maybe their browsing experience is subpar, but “unusable” is categorically false.
    - throwawaynay 5y ago
      using a fork to eat soup is possible
      - catlifeonmars 5y ago
        Indeed. To stretch that analogy a bit further, spoons can be seen as a new technology which pushes the cost-benefit curve out. As with all new technologies, adoption can be gradual. For a time, lots of people will continue to eat soup with forks, until soup browsers begin shipping with spoons by default.
    - OptionX 5y ago
      Taken from Merriam-Webster: >not capable of being used or fit for use : not usable And their example: >The lavatory, totally unusable, was full of snow which had blasted in through the keyhole. Which is categorically false of course because you can very well do your business before hypothermia sets in.
gnicholas 5y ago
I’ve wondered this as well, especially since the primary effect of the change appears to be undermining adblockers. I could see Congress looking into a change like this, and hopefully an inquiry would be enough to get them to hold off.

by bambax 5y ago

falafelite 5y ago

Ah okay thanks for sharing the Mozilla update. And I suppose I am less optimistic than you, since they have so much browser market share I’d guess they’re happy to let devs figure out how to make our stuff work if we want access to their users. It’s also notable that so far v3 is only mandated for new extensions, though I’m not sure if that applies to updates of existing extensions.

jaredsohn 5y ago
It applies to updates of existing extensions in January 2023. https://developer.chrome.com/blog/mv2-transition/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/mv2-transition/

freedomben 5y ago

I hope you're right. You're certainly right in my case: I will switch completely to FF when that happens. I was an early adopter of Chrome and while I do use FF quite a bit as my "work" profile, breaking extensions that make the web usable will cause me to leave and never look back (unless you are rate and the walk back v3)

pvity 5y ago

[dead]

catlifeonmars 5y ago

> Chrome without uBlock (or any browser really) is unusable. Source? If this is anecdotal, it seems unlikely that it’s representative.

OptionX 5y ago
It's axiomatic based on its self-evident nature.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- catlifeonmars 5y ago
  Can you clarify? What is self evident? Plenty of people use Chrome without blockers. Maybe their browsing experience is subpar, but “unusable” is categorically false.
  - throwawaynay 5y ago
    using a fork to eat soup is possible
    - catlifeonmars 5y ago
      Indeed. To stretch that analogy a bit further, spoons can be seen as a new technology which pushes the cost-benefit curve out. As with all new technologies, adoption can be gradual. For a time, lots of people will continue to eat soup with forks, until soup browsers begin shipping with spoons by default.
  - OptionX 5y ago
    Taken from Merriam-Webster: >not capable of being used or fit for use : not usable And their example: >The lavatory, totally unusable, was full of snow which had blasted in through the keyhole. Which is categorically false of course because you can very well do your business before hypothermia sets in.

gnicholas 5y ago

I’ve wondered this as well, especially since the primary effect of the change appears to be undermining adblockers. I could see Congress looking into a change like this, and hopefully an inquiry would be enough to get them to hold off.