3 ms·

I've said this on here before: Ad blockers need to make no attempt to function at all with MV3. They should maybe even go out of their way to not work. Any ad

I've said this on here before: Ad blockers need to make no attempt to function at all with MV3. They should maybe even go out of their way to not work. Any ad blocker installed on chrome should just bring up a message that said (not 100% truthfully) that ad blocking can't be made to work on Chrome, please go to Firefox to continue ad free browsing. This will shift a lot of users. Especially the more technical ones who then tell their less tech savvy friends and when they go home for Thanksgiving they can just install Firefox on dad's computer so he stops falling for stupid scam ads. This can work, and I think work pretty well. This does not mean that Firefox is the end all, be all. That hypothetical usurper browser you mention can still swoop in and scoop up the new Firefox users as well as the poor saps who stayed on Chrome.

Dalewyn 4y ago
Ideology, much less deception, is not how you convince the commons on something as mundane as a web browser. Firefox didn't usurp IE6 because it was FOSS, Firefox won because it was straight up better. Likewise, any contender to Chrome today must demonstrate objective, practical superiority (and be honest about it). The commons don't know nor care what FOSS is, arguing FOSS to the commons is a fool's errand. I appreciate gorhill, a trusted name, took the initiative to release a MV3 adblocker, because that simple act stopped fools like you who would readily deceive users to force an issue. Also, pro tip: Deception doesn't last for long, and once it comes to light you are never regaining that lost trust and respect.
- malermeister 4y ago
  Gorhill himself said the MV3 version is significantly worse. It's not ideology or deception, MV2 is just better for ad blockers. It's just a matter of correctly conveying that to the masses.
- Fatnino 4y ago
  As long as the few people with the skills to make a (very watered down, thanks to Google) adblocker for mv3 don't. Then for the average user the statement "you can't block ads on Chrome" approximates to true. If the hobbled ad blockers get made anyway then the effect pushing to Firefox will be lesser but still there. Especially since ad networks will not be able to restrain themselves from abusing the initial crack in the door and users find themselves staring at more and more ads.

Dalewyn 4y ago

Ideology, much less deception, is not how you convince the commons on something as mundane as a web browser. Firefox didn't usurp IE6 because it was FOSS, Firefox won because it was straight up better. Likewise, any contender to Chrome today must demonstrate objective, practical superiority (and be honest about it). The commons don't know nor care what FOSS is, arguing FOSS to the commons is a fool's errand. I appreciate gorhill, a trusted name, took the initiative to release a MV3 adblocker, because that simple act stopped fools like you who would readily deceive users to force an issue. Also, pro tip: Deception doesn't last for long, and once it comes to light you are never regaining that lost trust and respect.

malermeister 4y ago
Gorhill himself said the MV3 version is significantly worse. It's not ideology or deception, MV2 is just better for ad blockers. It's just a matter of correctly conveying that to the masses.
Fatnino 4y ago
As long as the few people with the skills to make a (very watered down, thanks to Google) adblocker for mv3 don't. Then for the average user the statement "you can't block ads on Chrome" approximates to true. If the hobbled ad blockers get made anyway then the effect pushing to Firefox will be lesser but still there. Especially since ad networks will not be able to restrain themselves from abusing the initial crack in the door and users find themselves staring at more and more ads.