4 ms·

So, does this still cripple ad blocking? It's pretty hard to parse from the post. I don't really care anyway. Chrome is not the internet. Just use Firefox.

by bloppe 3y ago

cookies23 3y ago
Not really. You can read AdGuard opinion on MV3 https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-manifest-v3-where-we-stand.html https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-manifest-v3-where-we-stan...
- anonymousab 3y ago
  > Despite losing a small part of their functionality, ad blockers will still be able to offer nearly the same quality of filtering that they demonstrated with Manifest V2. If some mechanism or capability is no longer possible or is made infeasible for adblockers to control, then ads will simply switch to using that mechanism. It's a pretty obvious outcome. You cannot simply give just an inch with adtech.
  - e2le 3y ago
    I would be interested to see a list of capabilities and features lost in MV3. For example, do we lose CNAME filtering or strict-blocking? It's not clear what we are losing.
    - ghostwords 3y ago
      We lose the ability to innovate. The browser (Google) becomes the gatekeeper. And yes, we lose CNAME filtering.[1] https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/151#issuecomment-1018778881 https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/151#issuecomment... Google is an advertising company. Chrome extensions already experienced a lost decade, where nothing much happened until the Manifest V3 "proposal". It's not a good idea to let Google hold the keys to anti-tracking tech. [1] I stand corrected, DNS lookups are not part of webRequest in MV2 Chrome either. This doesn't change my larger point.
      - magicalist 3y ago
        > And yes, we lose CNAME filtering But Chrome never had CNAME filtering before either
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - madars 3y ago
      CNAME uncloaking does not work in Chrome: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
    - bluish29 3y ago
      The last time I check a couple of months ago these was the list of things that we lose (Things might have changed so I welcome correction from any kind) - Now any block filter list will have be updated with a plugin update. So no fetching lists from links directly. - strict blocking ability [1] - No dynamic filtering [2] - No Custom lists (own or third party by the user) - Element Picker [3] [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Strict-blocking https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Strict-blocking [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode [3] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker
  - maxloh 3y ago
    In my understanding, content blocking proxy should still work. For example, - https://github.com/barre/privaxy https://github.com/barre/privaxy - https://github.com/AdguardTeam/urlfilter https://github.com/AdguardTeam/urlfilter
VancouverMan 3y ago
> Just use Firefox. That approach doesn't work well given Firefox's established track record of just imitating Chrome, and then getting rid of the prior (and better) way of doing things. XUL extension developers are well aware of this problem, for example. We've seen it happen repeatedly with Firefox's UI, too.
- fooker 3y ago
  No one was willing to keep supporting XUL.
- bloppe 3y ago
  If the biggest knock against Firefox is that it imitates Chrome too often, that's hardly a reason to stick with Chrome. And they aren't afraid to diverge from Chrome in important ways. For example, letting you disable 3p cookies already.
- spartanatreyu 3y ago
  > That approach doesn't work well given Firefox's established track record of just imitating Chrome Established track record? What? > and then getting rid of the prior (and better) way of doing things. Do you mean how they did the complete opposite by keeping Manifest v2 around for much longer than Google wanted to? Then by making their own Manifest v3 that didn't gimp ad blockers like google has been trying to for years? > XUL extension developers are well aware of this problem, for example. XUL was super useful... for it's time. But it became a drag on performance as Firefox became more optimised for multi-core CPUs. And it became a drag for developers trying to support an older standard. Sure the new extension standard became more difficult to get started, but it did push the workers standards forwards which is ultimately what the web needed. > We've seen it happen repeatedly with Firefox's UI, too. Firefox's UI goes up and down in quality all the time. Thinking nothing is improving at all is an observational bias.
- lofaszvanitt 3y ago
  They have to, since big silicon valley companies just copy things and sell it as their own, like everyone exists to wipe their arses. Essentially they are stealing whatever they can find. If you copy and coexist with them they can't steal shit, and since they can't innovate, because they lack the brainspace for it, they'll slowly die. Maybe this is one of the reasons Firefox acts like a braindead monkey.

So, does this still cripple ad blocking? It's pretty hard to parse from the post. I don't really care anyway. Chrome is not the internet. Just use Firefox.

by bloppe 3y ago

So, does this still cripple ad blocking? It's pretty hard to parse from the post. I don't really care anyway. Chrome is not the internet. Just use Firefox.

cookies23 3y ago

Not really. You can read AdGuard opinion on MV3 https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-manifest-v3-where-we-stand.html https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-manifest-v3-where-we-stan...

anonymousab 3y ago
> Despite losing a small part of their functionality, ad blockers will still be able to offer nearly the same quality of filtering that they demonstrated with Manifest V2. If some mechanism or capability is no longer possible or is made infeasible for adblockers to control, then ads will simply switch to using that mechanism. It's a pretty obvious outcome. You cannot simply give just an inch with adtech.
- e2le 3y ago
  I would be interested to see a list of capabilities and features lost in MV3. For example, do we lose CNAME filtering or strict-blocking? It's not clear what we are losing.
  - ghostwords 3y ago
    We lose the ability to innovate. The browser (Google) becomes the gatekeeper. And yes, we lose CNAME filtering.[1] https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/151#issuecomment-1018778881 https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/151#issuecomment... Google is an advertising company. Chrome extensions already experienced a lost decade, where nothing much happened until the Manifest V3 "proposal". It's not a good idea to let Google hold the keys to anti-tracking tech. [1] I stand corrected, DNS lookups are not part of webRequest in MV2 Chrome either. This doesn't change my larger point.
    - magicalist 3y ago
      > And yes, we lose CNAME filtering But Chrome never had CNAME filtering before either
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
  - madars 3y ago
    CNAME uncloaking does not work in Chrome: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
  - bluish29 3y ago
    The last time I check a couple of months ago these was the list of things that we lose (Things might have changed so I welcome correction from any kind) - Now any block filter list will have be updated with a plugin update. So no fetching lists from links directly. - strict blocking ability [1] - No dynamic filtering [2] - No Custom lists (own or third party by the user) - Element Picker [3] [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Strict-blocking https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Strict-blocking [2] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode [3] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker
- maxloh 3y ago
  In my understanding, content blocking proxy should still work. For example, - https://github.com/barre/privaxy https://github.com/barre/privaxy - https://github.com/AdguardTeam/urlfilter https://github.com/AdguardTeam/urlfilter

VancouverMan 3y ago

> Just use Firefox. That approach doesn't work well given Firefox's established track record of just imitating Chrome, and then getting rid of the prior (and better) way of doing things. XUL extension developers are well aware of this problem, for example. We've seen it happen repeatedly with Firefox's UI, too.

fooker 3y ago
No one was willing to keep supporting XUL.
bloppe 3y ago
If the biggest knock against Firefox is that it imitates Chrome too often, that's hardly a reason to stick with Chrome. And they aren't afraid to diverge from Chrome in important ways. For example, letting you disable 3p cookies already.
spartanatreyu 3y ago
> That approach doesn't work well given Firefox's established track record of just imitating Chrome Established track record? What? > and then getting rid of the prior (and better) way of doing things. Do you mean how they did the complete opposite by keeping Manifest v2 around for much longer than Google wanted to? Then by making their own Manifest v3 that didn't gimp ad blockers like google has been trying to for years? > XUL extension developers are well aware of this problem, for example. XUL was super useful... for it's time. But it became a drag on performance as Firefox became more optimised for multi-core CPUs. And it became a drag for developers trying to support an older standard. Sure the new extension standard became more difficult to get started, but it did push the workers standards forwards which is ultimately what the web needed. > We've seen it happen repeatedly with Firefox's UI, too. Firefox's UI goes up and down in quality all the time. Thinking nothing is improving at all is an observational bias.
lofaszvanitt 3y ago
They have to, since big silicon valley companies just copy things and sell it as their own, like everyone exists to wipe their arses. Essentially they are stealing whatever they can find. If you copy and coexist with them they can't steal shit, and since they can't innovate, because they lack the brainspace for it, they'll slowly die. Maybe this is one of the reasons Firefox acts like a braindead monkey.