7 ms·

Google confirms they will disable uBlock Origin in Chrome in 2024

233 points by lopkeny12ko 3y ago

ge96 3y ago
Oooooohhhh boyyy. This could be good, I'll stop consuming media or use Firefox more. I'm just mindlessly connected to media on my spare time.
- DistractionRect 3y ago
  I've been using Firefox exclusively for a few years on Desktop and mobile, and it has been great. It's pretty rare that something doesn't support Firefox, and usually it's some weird web tech demo I found on here. Nothing that I'd miss. Ublock Origin is no small part of why I use Firefox for Android, and a redirection plug-in for old reddit, nitter, etc make following links in forums sufferable.
  - aetherspawn 3y ago
    When Firefox is not supported it's usually because the website explicitly checks the user agent and not because of an actual compatibility issue, i.e. business.apple.com blocks Firefox specifically... which is an absolute joke because Apple has Apple resources.
spondylosaurus 3y ago
I know the submission title matches the title of the Reddit post, but both titles are misleading—Google didn't mention uBO by name, they just confirmed that all Manifest v2 extensions will be disabled.
- xdennis 3y ago
  Of course Google don't mention uBO by name. But this is the real reason they are doing it. Privacy is just a pretext. uBO lite will still be available but it will be very nerfed. Hopefully people move to Firefox, but I'm not so optimistic. It took a huge campaign to get people to move from IE6 to Firefox, and I'm not certain it can be replicated with Chrome.
  - ge96 3y ago
    What is the nerfing reason between 2/3?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Scion9066 3y ago
      Switching to an extension providing a list of things to block or redirect to the browser rather than the extension having access to all content on every page that you visit. I'd imagine that people don't vet extensions nearly as much as they should for the access they give them to all their web browser traffic. Not to mention an extension that is okay now may not be once sold to someone else (for those extension developers not as honorable as those of uBlock Origin and hoverzoom).
      - ge96 3y ago
        Oh man I've seen that happen before eg. a JSON parser I feel the same. It's crazy what kind of extensions people just use, there is one called Snov or something, to add a pixel in emails... it's like dude, you gave this random company access to read your emails... idk. which yeah... UBO but still that's open source at least. An extension you can view the source sure.
        soraminazuki 3y ago
        uBO is more exceptional than typical open source extensions. Its developers has shown themselves to be much more trustworthy and well-intentioned than Google.
        dabockster 3y ago
        I think, at some point, people should have the right to be stupid on their computers. What needs to change is holding them liable if their negligence affects others.
    - konart 3y ago
- jjulius 3y ago
  ... which means that UBO will be disabled. If A=B and B=C, then yadda yadda.
  - apetresc 3y ago
    Sure, but surely you agree there's a difference in implication, right? Like, if a headline says "McDonald's Announces It Will Stop Serving McNuggets to Donald Trump", and the story was actually that McDonald's was discontinuing McNuggets altogether (and therefore also to Trump), would you call that misleading or just an honest application of the transitive property?
    - meiraleal 3y ago
      > would you call that misleading or just an honest application of the transitive property? The latter because McDonalds managers have been publicly discussing how and why they should stop serving nuggets to Trump in order to better protect their customers
      - Arainach 3y ago
        That's not true in reality or in your weird twisting of the metaphor. When has Google ever mentioned uBlock specifically?
    - john-radio 3y ago
      How dare you tease us with that pornographic hypothetical?
    - selcuka 3y ago
      Not the best analogy as we all know that the rationale behind the change is to cripple ad blockers. If most people thinks that McDonald's actual motive is to starve Trump, then it would be fair to post a headline like that too.
    - true_religion 3y ago
      If McDonalds sees a certain politician walking toward their register eyeing the picture of nuggets on the overhead screen, and they frantically rush to slap “sold out indefinitely” there… well, then I’ll think they had an agenda. Chrome wants to get ad revenue on YouTube, but those ads are blocked. Now, it after many years finally decides Manifest v2 has to go? Suspicious.
- Zandikar 3y ago
  Why are we linking to reddit posts and not just the actual source anyway?
  - dabockster 3y ago
    Why do you all even care? We’re on a web forum not the New York Times.
    - rsanek 3y ago
      it's in this web forum's rules > Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter.
- jugad 3y ago
  That sounds very similar to hiding behind sneaky talk in order to keep the practical effects in the background. Almost no-one cares about the terms "Manifest v2 extensions" - because almost no one recognizes them for what they really are. Most people can understand it by its effect - that it will disable UBO. Only sneaky people will insist on using the technically correct, but obscure term in a PUBLIC announcement - clearly the aim is to make sure that the public overlooks the announcement.
gavinhoward 3y ago
Glad I'm already on Firefox, but I wonder how long Manifest v2 will stay in Firefox.
- mmwelt 3y ago
  Fortunately, the MV3 implementation in Firefox has the necessary tweaks to continue supporting add-ons like uBlock Origin[1]. So, even when MV2 is eventually dropped in Firefox, ad-blocking add-ons written for Firefox will continue to be able to work without restrictions. [1] https://adguard.com/en/blog/firefox-manifestv3-chrome-adblocking.html https://adguard.com/en/blog/firefox-manifestv3-chrome-adbloc...
  - gavinhoward 3y ago
    You just made my day!
- p1mrx 3y ago
  Manifest V3 is mostly a good idea. Global variables only live for a few minutes, so extensions have to keep state in a key-value store instead. The code is more tedious, but this also helps extensions run well on Firefox for Android, where the OS kills processes at random. The main problem with Manifest V3 is that Google used the API version bump as an opportunity to remove the 'blocking webRequest' API from Chrome. Firefox is keeping the API: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/11/17/manifest-v3-signing-available-november-21-on-firefox-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/11/17/manifest-v3-signi...
tyingq 3y ago
Next will be the litany of comments pointing out that the declarative API works reasonably well for blocking ads. That's mostly true, for now. Google's shown in several different areas that they know how to slow-roll the real objective over years, when needed. This is roughly the equivalent of taking a heuristic malware blocker and making it depend solely on file names or file checksums. I can't prove it, but I feel like it's only the first shoe dropping.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  > that the declarative API works reasonably well for blocking ads Depending on your definition of "reasonably"; it does appear to result in worse coverage, and how much is not clear to me.
- krackers 3y ago
  How does MV3 affect content script injection? I looked a bit more into how uBO does xhr-content based filtering (like it uses to block YT ads) and it appears to shim the fetch() method. Would this approach still work in a MV3 world? And if it does still work, doesn't this negate any supposed security/privacy benefits of the declarative model?
  - simcop2387 3y ago
    My understanding is thay it doesn[t work in mv3, precisely bevause of that security issue.
    - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y ago
      What's the problem to let user chose to let that specific extension to use the more invasive access mode, like we already do with other extension permissions?
      - 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
slig 3y ago
Just use FF or Brave.
meitros 3y ago
Considering how much edge wants to gain back browser share, if they kept mv2 support the combination of supporting real ad blocking while still being a chromium browser is pretty appealing.
- hankman86 3y ago
  Exactly. Being able to effectively block ads is a highly desirable feature. All it takes is a well-funded marketing campaign that educates users when Google stops supporting MV2 extensions.
sparrish 3y ago
They've been saying this since 2018. I'll believe it when I see it. https://blog.chromium.org/2018/10/trustworthy-chrome-extensions-by-default.html https://blog.chromium.org/2018/10/trustworthy-chrome-extensi...
- bentcorner 3y ago
  I get the feeling that along with youtube anti-adblock efforts that this is google rifling-through-the-couch-cushions phase, and we'll see them actually execute this time because it's worth it. Makes me wonder if they have plans to deal with FF as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see them stop paying for FF search box defaults or progressively negotiate lower payments each year.
- hankman86 3y ago
  Google is so reliant on ads, they will probably push through with this. More ads in search, YouTube, GMail and the wider Web is the only way for them to grow revenue. More other Google businesses are small fish compared to their ad revenue. Let’s hope that other browser makers use this opportunity to attack. Chrome’s dominant market share is unhealthy for the Internet anyway.
tomrod 3y ago
Firefox gaining market share yet? It gained me; FF's hostile 2021 summer mobile release really burned me. But guess who is back? Can't stand this garbage. Ads are a malicious code payload vector worth blocking. We will be likely move our business off Google Suite too. Any suggestions on good replacements with trustworthy vendors?
- hankman86 3y ago
  Microsoft 365.
  - ashton314 3y ago
    You can’t be serious.
    - tomrod 3y ago
      A lot of people use it But if I wanted MS, we would have started on MS instead of Google Suite. Yeah, it's out there, but I agree with you, not a trustworthy option.
- dilawar 3y ago
  We are a small startup using Zoho and Notion (for developeras and knowledge base). We like Zoho. Whenever we felt like we need a solution now for some new requirement, they have it! Some of their apps are very good like Books, Expense, Sign, Drive and Write, most are good enough and a few need more work (calendar, booking, and meet). When you need help there is always a person to talk to and they are pretty fast in support. In dollar pricing, they are very cheap, but in India, they are still on pricey side. But worth every rupee we spend on them. Zoho CEO is bit of a character!
  - SanjayMehta 3y ago
    Another vote for Zoho. What we like is the ability for every email user to be on a different plan, the savings really added up compared to what Google wanted.
mgiampapa 3y ago
Thankfully we should all be able to sideload Firefox on IOs by then.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  I mean, you already couldn't use uBo in the Chrome skin of webkit on iOS, os I don't see that this makes any difference there.
  - mgiampapa 3y ago
    Presumably, Mozilla or someone else, will provide a side-loadable version of Firefox for iOS with regular manifest v2 / v3 support. Android users already have this via the Play Store and it works great since Google doesn't ban other browser / rendering engines.
partiallypro 3y ago
I assume this will not affect Edge? Or will this effect Chromium in general?
- mattl 3y ago
  I believe Chromium-based browsers can choose to ignore this. IIRC, Vivaldi already said they would?
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    They can, but that means dealing with the overhead that comes with maintaining a divergent and ever increasingly different code base from the forking point. Every single browser except for Safari and Firechrome today is based off Chromium because devs are either lazy or incapable of writing and maintaining their own browser engines. So can browsers forked from Chromium ignore this and keep MV2? Sure. Will they? Hell no.
    - jfoster 3y ago
      Google pay other browser vendors significant amounts to be the default search engine. If any browser were too far ahead of Chrome on blocking advertising, wouldn't Google care substantially less about being the default search engine on that browser? Ad blockers switch off the primary revenue stream for browsers & websites alike. https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-search-deal-safari-18-billion https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-se...
- jfoster 3y ago
  I haven't been following too closely, but as far as I know, MV3 is coming to pretty much all browsers, including Firefox. https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/10/31/begin-your-mv3-migration-by-implementing-new-features-today/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/10/31/begin-your-mv3-mi...
nojs 3y ago
How does this affect Brave’s built in ad blocking?
- sva_ 3y ago
  I think both Vivaldi and brave have in the past claimed that they will keep manifest v2 going. And maybe others?
- xcv123 3y ago
  Brave is built on the open source Chromium project. As long as it's open source they can't stop Brave doing whatever they want and ignoring these changes.
- plorkyeran 3y ago
  Brave's adblocking is not an extension and is entirely unaffected by changes to how extensions work.
Timber-6539 3y ago
Title is very misleading. Not just uBlock but every other non-MV3 compliant extension will be dropped. If the Chrome team stick to their timeline. Also, it would be prudent to note that an MV3 version of uBlock Origin has existed for quite some time now.
- selcuka 3y ago
  Sure, but it doesn't have the same functionality [1]: > With Manifest V3, uBlock is required to limit how many websites our users are able to add to their allow lists. Going forward, you'll only be able to add up to 5,000 websites to your allow lists. > Moving forward, we’ll no longer be able to enable automatic daily updates to filter lists. [1] https://support.ublock.org/hc/en-us/articles/11749958544275-Google-s-Manifest-V3-What-it-is-and-what-it-means-for-uBlock-Users- https://support.ublock.org/hc/en-us/articles/11749958544275-...
  - Timber-6539 3y ago
    There are some recent improvements underway over the number of rules allowed by MV3's declarativeNetRequest API. https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-filtering-in-manifest-v3/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-fi...
  - tech234a 3y ago
    Important note: ublock.org is NOT related to uBlock Origin [1] [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-is-completely-unrelated-to-the-web-site-ublock.org https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-is-comp...
rochak 3y ago
RIP Chrome users lol
archsurface 3y ago
I remain baffled that people are still using chrome. Each to their own.
- asylteltine 3y ago
  I love safari. It’s blazing fast, battery efficient, and cares about my privacy. Firefox is okay but I only use that on my gaming pc.
  - phantomathkg 3y ago
    Have you use multiple tab on iPhone, which basically suck more and more juice from the battery the more tab is opened?
    - Loggias 3y ago
      [dead]
  - brokenmachine 3y ago
    Apple sucks though.
  - bitsandboots 3y ago
    > It's blazingly fast Why do people always say this as the reason for why they use a particular browser? They're ALL blazingly fast. I'm not going for a coffee break to load a page.
- geodel 3y ago
  Yeah, I remain baffled people are still using internet.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
    Whatever Google may wish, Chrome is not the internet. And given the choice, it is reasonable for a person to question why anyone would choose Chrome. I mean, I think there are plausible reasons[0], but it's an understandable view. [0] Not caring about ads or privacy and wanting the easy path, mostly.
youssefabdelm 3y ago
Will this affect Arc?
- konart 3y ago
  Unless they are going to build their browser with a custom V3 implementation like Firefox.
zygo 3y ago
Will it affect other chromium based browsers?
zanethomas 3y ago
Don't use it, don't care.
gkoberger 3y ago
uBlock Origin already has a v3 (experimental) version: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/ddkjiahejlhfcafbddmgiahcphecmpfh?pli=1 https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/... Yeah, it's not ideal, but this title feels overblown. uBlock seems confident they can make it (mostly) work.
- tomrod 3y ago
  Given YouTubes recent adblockblocking moves, it's reasonable to infer that it is in fact to prevent ad blocking, enabling delivery of malicious, undesired payloads.
  - oh_sigh 3y ago
    What is it about manifest v3 that would make blocking youtube ads impossible, but would continue to be possible with manifest v2?
    - tomrod 3y ago
      As a user of their service, rather than a developer of ads or their service, it isn't incumbent on me to care about their approach. Rather, it is incumbent on me to exercise caveat emptor, and understand that Google has both exercised nefariously in prior activities and that ads are how they choose to make revenue. Ergo, trust is low.
    - Scion9066 3y ago
      It isn't the manifest version directly that is doing this, just the permissions/api changes that are happening at the same time. Firefox for example is keeping the old style as an option while still implementing support for MV3 and the declarative option: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-firefox-recap-next-steps/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-fi... Mozilla will maintain support for blocking WebRequest in MV3. v3's has declarative blocking/redirecting of things vs v2's read/write access to all network requests on any page. https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/migrating/blocking-web-requests/ https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/migrating/block... Manifest V3 changes how extensions handle modification of network requests. Instead of intercepting network requests and altering them at runtime with chrome.webRequest, your extension specifies rules that describe actions to perform when a given set of conditions is met. Do this using the Declarative Net Request API. https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/manifest/declarativeNetRequest/ https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/manifest/de... Using declarativeNetRequest, you can block or modify network requests by specifying declarative rules. This lets extensions modify network requests without intercepting them and viewing their content, providing more privacy.
nine_zeros 3y ago
Chrome, Google and most websites are insufferable without ad blockers. I can't imagine living a life with so many ads. Firefox, here I come.
- marssaxman 3y ago
  Come on in, the water's fine! I haven't used Chrome in years and don't miss it.
hankman86 3y ago
That’s actually a meaningful way for other browser makers to differentiate themselves. Notably Firefox, but potentially also Microsoft Edge. While Edge is based on Chrome, they could decide to keep supporting manifest V2 extensions.
skullone 3y ago
I tell everyone I know to use Firefox with uBlock. It's a small good deed, but everyone should get off Google and MS products.
lordfrito 3y ago
I can't believe its coming to this. I've been de-googling myself slowly over the past 5 years or so. The shift has been marked, but even cynical old me is surprised how quickly they are turning on their user base. The signs have been there all along though. So... in all seriousness... Brave or Firefox? What about that Kagi Orion browser?
- rossdavidh 3y ago
  I use both Brave (on my phone) and Firefox (on my laptop), and they both work fine.
  - Ayesh 3y ago
    Me too. I have Firefox installed on my phone (Android) as well, but I found Brave to be faster with its "baked in" ad blocker compared to Firefox Android + uBO. Brave on Android is still an annoying software, with VPN, Rewards, and News icons in the burger menu that you can't disable. You can turn off the services, but the icons do not go away.
- defensem3ch 3y ago
  vivaldi
  - spiritplumber 3y ago
    is it still around?
    - TheFreim 3y ago
      Still around getting updates, I've been using it for a while now.
- karmasimida 3y ago
  > they are turning on their user base Their user base are not us.
- 3y ago
irrational 3y ago
I have been using Firefox since version 1 as my primary browser, originally because it had Firebug, and later out of apathy to change. I’m also weird in that I’ve been using DDG as my sole search engine for years. I haven’t felt like I’ve been held back by these tools in the slightest, whether for web development or personal use.
- paul7986 3y ago
  Same with both yet DDG I'm sorry to say as its creator is very nice guy/helpful guy but it feels stale to me. They should've released their own search engine long before that bad PR thing showed Microsoft was harvesting some data. Joe Rogan prior was promoting DDG for awhile to his millions of listeners.
- toastercat 3y ago
  I like the idea of DDG, but its search results have always been noticeably weaker than Google and even Brave Search these days. As an example, try searching "DuckDNS" on DDG. The homepage is nowhere to be found on the first several pages of DDG, but is rightfully the first result on Google.
  - irrational 3y ago
    Personally, I've never had a problem finding what I'm looking for using DDG, but I also have never compared the results on DDG with Google Search.
EmmEff 3y ago
There are other usable browsers… haven’t had Chrome on my machines in literally years.
- nicce 3y ago
  But you have likely have Chromium based browsers. It takes a lot of work to maintain those if they keep on the old manifest versions.
jchw 3y ago
Hey, this one might actually finally help Firefox's marketshare. Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting anything massive, but imagine if people's adblockers got disabled over night: a horde of technically-inclined users, being newly-introduced to what the Internet currently is like to use without an adblocker, might just decide it's worth it to switch rather than try Manifest v3 adblockers and find out if it's really good enough. (It is not terrible right now, but really, why bother? It's not as good.)
sys_64738 3y ago
Vivaldi is Chrome without GOOG.
px43 3y ago
This is dumb. Manifest v3 is better than v2. For security, privacy, efficiency, reliability, etc. uBlock origin will work just fine, and be a hell of a lot more efficient using v3. https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/ddkjiahejlhfcafbddmgiahcphecmpfh?pli=1 https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/...
- graphe 3y ago
  Better for whom? You're just spouting marketing terms like 'reliability' as if v2 wasn't reliable.
preommr 3y ago
Dark times ahead. Firefox is mainly funded by Google, if they've decided to be this aggressive about it, then I am guessing that they've absolved whatever restraint they had and that they're probably going to either force Firefox to follow suit, or cut funding. Neither bodes well for the people's champion in the browser wars.
clouddrover 3y ago
If you care about uBlock Origin then use Firefox. uBlock Origin works best in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
- dredmorbius 3y ago
  Given Chrome/Android doesn't support extensions at all, and Firefox/Android does, for Android you'd tend to prefer Firefox as your browser regardless. (Or another browser which supports adblocking natively. I use EinkBro (on an e-ink device) most of the time; it has integrated ad-blocking. I believe Brave and Vivaldi will also provide ad-blocking.) Vivaldi: Yep. "Vivaldi Browser on Android | Fast Android browser with Ad blocker" (from page title) <https://vivaldi.com/android/ https://vivaldi.com/android/> Brave: Yep. "Brave Browser is a web browser app that blocks ads, protects your privacy..." <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.browser https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.brow...>
NN88 3y ago
Considering how pro-privacy Apple is, I wonder why Safari’s extensions don’t offer the same level of dexterity Chrome and Firefox do
defensem3ch 3y ago
surprised to see a lack of support for vivaldi. i am a Firefox user and i love it, but vivaldi is also pretty good
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Kye 3y ago
Remember Xkcd 792 from September 2010? https://xkcd.com/792/ https://xkcd.com/792/ It turns out the answer 13 years on really was "make boatloads of money." That's it. That's all they have. They don't know how to innovate anymore. Tightening their grip is the final strategy.
SanjayMehta 3y ago
Firefox works almost all the time and is getting better with every release. For the sites which look for Chrome, there’s Brave.
dev1ycan 3y ago
I am so glad, so glad I was proven right, I knew the second back in like 2009 when I tried chrome and right clicked on a youtube channel background and it didn't let me get the image link unlike firefox that Chrome was an evil that was going to creep to who knows what standards. And here we are, 14 years later, Google finally slowly got its masterplan done, and it will keep getting worse. While I have many grievances with Firefox, there is simply no alternative, the only real alternative is Firefox, don't even give Google the benefit of using chromium, if you truly care switch to Firefox and make everyone else switch, worst case scenario use a chromium alternative but please do not use Chrome anymore, if you are a techie swap everyone you know to an alternative browser.
VMtest 3y ago
off topic, why this reddit URL subdomain is "sh"?
fyrn_ 3y ago
Features lost by the Ublock Origin V3 version by gorehill: - No cosmetic filtering (##) - No scriptlet injection (##+js) - No redirect= filters - No csp= filters - No removeparam= filters This isn't just a oh no we need to rewrite for V3, it's a very user hostile action to take control away from users. Because only Google can be trusted of course.
- mmcnl 3y ago
  The original source mentions "a new UserScripts API"[0]. [0] https://developer.chrome.com/blog/resuming-the-transition-to-mv3/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/resuming-the-transition-to...
shmerl 3y ago
Good thing I never bought into Chrome hype. Use Firefox.
dang 3y ago
Related ongoing thread: Google resumes transition to Manifest V3 for Chrome extensions - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409 - Nov 2023 (73 comments)
mimikatz 3y ago
This is actually the best chance Microsoft has to bring Edge back from the dead and make people support using it.
- weikju 3y ago
  Going from one abusive partner to another will not fix the issue
hexadec 3y ago
This is the inverse of accurate, uBlock Origin already has a MV3 extension in progress (beta at https://ublockorigin.com/ https://ublockorigin.com/ top middle of the page). As others have noted, uBO is not even named in the Google releases, this applies to all MV2 extensions. Annoyed they are barrelling ahead with this still, but not an attack on uBO or ad-blockers directly. Seems like they even made some changes to service workers to enable ad-blockers as well. Perhaps gorhill will weigh in with more comments if he sees this. Curious if any of their changes to MV3 actually moved the needle on the issues previously identified.
ChrisArchitect 3y ago
[dupe] The story is about the Manifest v3 transition, not about uBlock (whether it's included or not. boohoo) Thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409
kyriakos 3y ago
Wondering how Microsoft Edge will deal with this. Follow Google?
hiyer 3y ago
I wish FF would implement support for WebAuthN Passkeys so I can use it for work as well :-(
welzel 3y ago
It is the same as with YT anti-adblock: all it does is move people away from Chrome. Chrome had a good run, but it is time again to help family members and organisations to migrate to ... firefox and never look back. Google has lost its ways and i am sure that "don´t do evil" was just replaced by "do evil stuff in a sneaky way".

233 points by lopkeny12ko 3y ago

ge96 3y ago

Oooooohhhh boyyy. This could be good, I'll stop consuming media or use Firefox more. I'm just mindlessly connected to media on my spare time.

DistractionRect 3y ago
I've been using Firefox exclusively for a few years on Desktop and mobile, and it has been great. It's pretty rare that something doesn't support Firefox, and usually it's some weird web tech demo I found on here. Nothing that I'd miss. Ublock Origin is no small part of why I use Firefox for Android, and a redirection plug-in for old reddit, nitter, etc make following links in forums sufferable.
- aetherspawn 3y ago
  When Firefox is not supported it's usually because the website explicitly checks the user agent and not because of an actual compatibility issue, i.e. business.apple.com blocks Firefox specifically... which is an absolute joke because Apple has Apple resources.

spondylosaurus 3y ago

I know the submission title matches the title of the Reddit post, but both titles are misleading—Google didn't mention uBO by name, they just confirmed that all Manifest v2 extensions will be disabled.

xdennis 3y ago
Of course Google don't mention uBO by name. But this is the real reason they are doing it. Privacy is just a pretext. uBO lite will still be available but it will be very nerfed. Hopefully people move to Firefox, but I'm not so optimistic. It took a huge campaign to get people to move from IE6 to Firefox, and I'm not certain it can be replicated with Chrome.
- ge96 3y ago
  What is the nerfing reason between 2/3?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Scion9066 3y ago
    Switching to an extension providing a list of things to block or redirect to the browser rather than the extension having access to all content on every page that you visit. I'd imagine that people don't vet extensions nearly as much as they should for the access they give them to all their web browser traffic. Not to mention an extension that is okay now may not be once sold to someone else (for those extension developers not as honorable as those of uBlock Origin and hoverzoom).
    - ge96 3y ago
      Oh man I've seen that happen before eg. a JSON parser I feel the same. It's crazy what kind of extensions people just use, there is one called Snov or something, to add a pixel in emails... it's like dude, you gave this random company access to read your emails... idk. which yeah... UBO but still that's open source at least. An extension you can view the source sure.
      - soraminazuki 3y ago
        uBO is more exceptional than typical open source extensions. Its developers has shown themselves to be much more trustworthy and well-intentioned than Google.
      - dabockster 3y ago
        I think, at some point, people should have the right to be stupid on their computers. What needs to change is holding them liable if their negligence affects others.
  - konart 3y ago
jjulius 3y ago
... which means that UBO will be disabled. If A=B and B=C, then yadda yadda.
- apetresc 3y ago
  Sure, but surely you agree there's a difference in implication, right? Like, if a headline says "McDonald's Announces It Will Stop Serving McNuggets to Donald Trump", and the story was actually that McDonald's was discontinuing McNuggets altogether (and therefore also to Trump), would you call that misleading or just an honest application of the transitive property?
  - meiraleal 3y ago
    > would you call that misleading or just an honest application of the transitive property? The latter because McDonalds managers have been publicly discussing how and why they should stop serving nuggets to Trump in order to better protect their customers
    - Arainach 3y ago
      That's not true in reality or in your weird twisting of the metaphor. When has Google ever mentioned uBlock specifically?
  - john-radio 3y ago
    How dare you tease us with that pornographic hypothetical?
  - selcuka 3y ago
    Not the best analogy as we all know that the rationale behind the change is to cripple ad blockers. If most people thinks that McDonald's actual motive is to starve Trump, then it would be fair to post a headline like that too.
  - true_religion 3y ago
    If McDonalds sees a certain politician walking toward their register eyeing the picture of nuggets on the overhead screen, and they frantically rush to slap “sold out indefinitely” there… well, then I’ll think they had an agenda. Chrome wants to get ad revenue on YouTube, but those ads are blocked. Now, it after many years finally decides Manifest v2 has to go? Suspicious.
Zandikar 3y ago
Why are we linking to reddit posts and not just the actual source anyway?
- dabockster 3y ago
  Why do you all even care? We’re on a web forum not the New York Times.
  - rsanek 3y ago
    it's in this web forum's rules > Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter.
jugad 3y ago
That sounds very similar to hiding behind sneaky talk in order to keep the practical effects in the background. Almost no-one cares about the terms "Manifest v2 extensions" - because almost no one recognizes them for what they really are. Most people can understand it by its effect - that it will disable UBO. Only sneaky people will insist on using the technically correct, but obscure term in a PUBLIC announcement - clearly the aim is to make sure that the public overlooks the announcement.

gavinhoward 3y ago

Glad I'm already on Firefox, but I wonder how long Manifest v2 will stay in Firefox.

mmwelt 3y ago
Fortunately, the MV3 implementation in Firefox has the necessary tweaks to continue supporting add-ons like uBlock Origin[1]. So, even when MV2 is eventually dropped in Firefox, ad-blocking add-ons written for Firefox will continue to be able to work without restrictions. [1] https://adguard.com/en/blog/firefox-manifestv3-chrome-adblocking.html https://adguard.com/en/blog/firefox-manifestv3-chrome-adbloc...
- gavinhoward 3y ago
  You just made my day!
p1mrx 3y ago
Manifest V3 is mostly a good idea. Global variables only live for a few minutes, so extensions have to keep state in a key-value store instead. The code is more tedious, but this also helps extensions run well on Firefox for Android, where the OS kills processes at random. The main problem with Manifest V3 is that Google used the API version bump as an opportunity to remove the 'blocking webRequest' API from Chrome. Firefox is keeping the API: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/11/17/manifest-v3-signing-available-november-21-on-firefox-nightly/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/11/17/manifest-v3-signi...

tyingq 3y ago

Next will be the litany of comments pointing out that the declarative API works reasonably well for blocking ads. That's mostly true, for now. Google's shown in several different areas that they know how to slow-roll the real objective over years, when needed. This is roughly the equivalent of taking a heuristic malware blocker and making it depend solely on file names or file checksums. I can't prove it, but I feel like it's only the first shoe dropping.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
> that the declarative API works reasonably well for blocking ads Depending on your definition of "reasonably"; it does appear to result in worse coverage, and how much is not clear to me.
krackers 3y ago
How does MV3 affect content script injection? I looked a bit more into how uBO does xhr-content based filtering (like it uses to block YT ads) and it appears to shim the fetch() method. Would this approach still work in a MV3 world? And if it does still work, doesn't this negate any supposed security/privacy benefits of the declarative model?
- simcop2387 3y ago
  My understanding is thay it doesn[t work in mv3, precisely bevause of that security issue.
  - EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y ago
    What's the problem to let user chose to let that specific extension to use the more invasive access mode, like we already do with other extension permissions?
    - 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

slig 3y ago

Just use FF or Brave.

meitros 3y ago

Considering how much edge wants to gain back browser share, if they kept mv2 support the combination of supporting real ad blocking while still being a chromium browser is pretty appealing.

hankman86 3y ago
Exactly. Being able to effectively block ads is a highly desirable feature. All it takes is a well-funded marketing campaign that educates users when Google stops supporting MV2 extensions.

sparrish 3y ago

They've been saying this since 2018. I'll believe it when I see it. https://blog.chromium.org/2018/10/trustworthy-chrome-extensions-by-default.html https://blog.chromium.org/2018/10/trustworthy-chrome-extensi...

bentcorner 3y ago
I get the feeling that along with youtube anti-adblock efforts that this is google rifling-through-the-couch-cushions phase, and we'll see them actually execute this time because it's worth it. Makes me wonder if they have plans to deal with FF as well. I wouldn't be surprised to see them stop paying for FF search box defaults or progressively negotiate lower payments each year.
hankman86 3y ago
Google is so reliant on ads, they will probably push through with this. More ads in search, YouTube, GMail and the wider Web is the only way for them to grow revenue. More other Google businesses are small fish compared to their ad revenue. Let’s hope that other browser makers use this opportunity to attack. Chrome’s dominant market share is unhealthy for the Internet anyway.

tomrod 3y ago

Firefox gaining market share yet? It gained me; FF's hostile 2021 summer mobile release really burned me. But guess who is back? Can't stand this garbage. Ads are a malicious code payload vector worth blocking. We will be likely move our business off Google Suite too. Any suggestions on good replacements with trustworthy vendors?

hankman86 3y ago
Microsoft 365.
- ashton314 3y ago
  You can’t be serious.
  - tomrod 3y ago
    A lot of people use it But if I wanted MS, we would have started on MS instead of Google Suite. Yeah, it's out there, but I agree with you, not a trustworthy option.
dilawar 3y ago
We are a small startup using Zoho and Notion (for developeras and knowledge base). We like Zoho. Whenever we felt like we need a solution now for some new requirement, they have it! Some of their apps are very good like Books, Expense, Sign, Drive and Write, most are good enough and a few need more work (calendar, booking, and meet). When you need help there is always a person to talk to and they are pretty fast in support. In dollar pricing, they are very cheap, but in India, they are still on pricey side. But worth every rupee we spend on them. Zoho CEO is bit of a character!
- SanjayMehta 3y ago
  Another vote for Zoho. What we like is the ability for every email user to be on a different plan, the savings really added up compared to what Google wanted.

mgiampapa 3y ago

Thankfully we should all be able to sideload Firefox on IOs by then.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
I mean, you already couldn't use uBo in the Chrome skin of webkit on iOS, os I don't see that this makes any difference there.
- mgiampapa 3y ago
  Presumably, Mozilla or someone else, will provide a side-loadable version of Firefox for iOS with regular manifest v2 / v3 support. Android users already have this via the Play Store and it works great since Google doesn't ban other browser / rendering engines.

partiallypro 3y ago

I assume this will not affect Edge? Or will this effect Chromium in general?

mattl 3y ago
I believe Chromium-based browsers can choose to ignore this. IIRC, Vivaldi already said they would?
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  They can, but that means dealing with the overhead that comes with maintaining a divergent and ever increasingly different code base from the forking point. Every single browser except for Safari and Firechrome today is based off Chromium because devs are either lazy or incapable of writing and maintaining their own browser engines. So can browsers forked from Chromium ignore this and keep MV2? Sure. Will they? Hell no.
  - jfoster 3y ago
    Google pay other browser vendors significant amounts to be the default search engine. If any browser were too far ahead of Chrome on blocking advertising, wouldn't Google care substantially less about being the default search engine on that browser? Ad blockers switch off the primary revenue stream for browsers & websites alike. https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-search-deal-safari-18-billion https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933206/google-apple-se...
jfoster 3y ago
I haven't been following too closely, but as far as I know, MV3 is coming to pretty much all browsers, including Firefox. https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/10/31/begin-your-mv3-migration-by-implementing-new-features-today/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/10/31/begin-your-mv3-mi...

nojs 3y ago

How does this affect Brave’s built in ad blocking?

sva_ 3y ago
I think both Vivaldi and brave have in the past claimed that they will keep manifest v2 going. And maybe others?
xcv123 3y ago
Brave is built on the open source Chromium project. As long as it's open source they can't stop Brave doing whatever they want and ignoring these changes.
plorkyeran 3y ago
Brave's adblocking is not an extension and is entirely unaffected by changes to how extensions work.

Timber-6539 3y ago

Title is very misleading. Not just uBlock but every other non-MV3 compliant extension will be dropped. If the Chrome team stick to their timeline. Also, it would be prudent to note that an MV3 version of uBlock Origin has existed for quite some time now.

selcuka 3y ago
Sure, but it doesn't have the same functionality [1]: > With Manifest V3, uBlock is required to limit how many websites our users are able to add to their allow lists. Going forward, you'll only be able to add up to 5,000 websites to your allow lists. > Moving forward, we’ll no longer be able to enable automatic daily updates to filter lists. [1] https://support.ublock.org/hc/en-us/articles/11749958544275-Google-s-Manifest-V3-What-it-is-and-what-it-means-for-uBlock-Users- https://support.ublock.org/hc/en-us/articles/11749958544275-...
- Timber-6539 3y ago
  There are some recent improvements underway over the number of rules allowed by MV3's declarativeNetRequest API. https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-filtering-in-manifest-v3/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/improvements-to-content-fi...
- tech234a 3y ago
  Important note: ublock.org is NOT related to uBlock Origin [1] [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-is-completely-unrelated-to-the-web-site-ublock.org https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-is-comp...

rochak 3y ago

RIP Chrome users lol

archsurface 3y ago

I remain baffled that people are still using chrome. Each to their own.

asylteltine 3y ago
I love safari. It’s blazing fast, battery efficient, and cares about my privacy. Firefox is okay but I only use that on my gaming pc.
- phantomathkg 3y ago
  Have you use multiple tab on iPhone, which basically suck more and more juice from the battery the more tab is opened?
  - Loggias 3y ago
    [dead]
- brokenmachine 3y ago
  Apple sucks though.
- bitsandboots 3y ago
  > It's blazingly fast Why do people always say this as the reason for why they use a particular browser? They're ALL blazingly fast. I'm not going for a coffee break to load a page.
geodel 3y ago
Yeah, I remain baffled people are still using internet.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  Whatever Google may wish, Chrome is not the internet. And given the choice, it is reasonable for a person to question why anyone would choose Chrome. I mean, I think there are plausible reasons[0], but it's an understandable view. [0] Not caring about ads or privacy and wanting the easy path, mostly.

youssefabdelm 3y ago

Will this affect Arc?

konart 3y ago
Unless they are going to build their browser with a custom V3 implementation like Firefox.

zygo 3y ago

Will it affect other chromium based browsers?

zanethomas 3y ago

Don't use it, don't care.

gkoberger 3y ago

uBlock Origin already has a v3 (experimental) version: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/ddkjiahejlhfcafbddmgiahcphecmpfh?pli=1 https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/... Yeah, it's not ideal, but this title feels overblown. uBlock seems confident they can make it (mostly) work.

tomrod 3y ago
Given YouTubes recent adblockblocking moves, it's reasonable to infer that it is in fact to prevent ad blocking, enabling delivery of malicious, undesired payloads.
- oh_sigh 3y ago
  What is it about manifest v3 that would make blocking youtube ads impossible, but would continue to be possible with manifest v2?
  - tomrod 3y ago
    As a user of their service, rather than a developer of ads or their service, it isn't incumbent on me to care about their approach. Rather, it is incumbent on me to exercise caveat emptor, and understand that Google has both exercised nefariously in prior activities and that ads are how they choose to make revenue. Ergo, trust is low.
  - Scion9066 3y ago
    It isn't the manifest version directly that is doing this, just the permissions/api changes that are happening at the same time. Firefox for example is keeping the old style as an option while still implementing support for MV3 and the declarative option: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-firefox-recap-next-steps/ https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-fi... Mozilla will maintain support for blocking WebRequest in MV3. v3's has declarative blocking/redirecting of things vs v2's read/write access to all network requests on any page. https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/migrating/blocking-web-requests/ https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/migrating/block... Manifest V3 changes how extensions handle modification of network requests. Instead of intercepting network requests and altering them at runtime with chrome.webRequest, your extension specifies rules that describe actions to perform when a given set of conditions is met. Do this using the Declarative Net Request API. https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/manifest/declarativeNetRequest/ https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/manifest/de... Using declarativeNetRequest, you can block or modify network requests by specifying declarative rules. This lets extensions modify network requests without intercepting them and viewing their content, providing more privacy.

nine_zeros 3y ago

Chrome, Google and most websites are insufferable without ad blockers. I can't imagine living a life with so many ads. Firefox, here I come.

marssaxman 3y ago
Come on in, the water's fine! I haven't used Chrome in years and don't miss it.

hankman86 3y ago

That’s actually a meaningful way for other browser makers to differentiate themselves. Notably Firefox, but potentially also Microsoft Edge. While Edge is based on Chrome, they could decide to keep supporting manifest V2 extensions.

skullone 3y ago

I tell everyone I know to use Firefox with uBlock. It's a small good deed, but everyone should get off Google and MS products.

lordfrito 3y ago

I can't believe its coming to this. I've been de-googling myself slowly over the past 5 years or so. The shift has been marked, but even cynical old me is surprised how quickly they are turning on their user base. The signs have been there all along though. So... in all seriousness... Brave or Firefox? What about that Kagi Orion browser?

rossdavidh 3y ago
I use both Brave (on my phone) and Firefox (on my laptop), and they both work fine.
- Ayesh 3y ago
  Me too. I have Firefox installed on my phone (Android) as well, but I found Brave to be faster with its "baked in" ad blocker compared to Firefox Android + uBO. Brave on Android is still an annoying software, with VPN, Rewards, and News icons in the burger menu that you can't disable. You can turn off the services, but the icons do not go away.
defensem3ch 3y ago
vivaldi
- spiritplumber 3y ago
  is it still around?
  - TheFreim 3y ago
    Still around getting updates, I've been using it for a while now.
karmasimida 3y ago
> they are turning on their user base Their user base are not us.
3y ago

irrational 3y ago

I have been using Firefox since version 1 as my primary browser, originally because it had Firebug, and later out of apathy to change. I’m also weird in that I’ve been using DDG as my sole search engine for years. I haven’t felt like I’ve been held back by these tools in the slightest, whether for web development or personal use.

paul7986 3y ago
Same with both yet DDG I'm sorry to say as its creator is very nice guy/helpful guy but it feels stale to me. They should've released their own search engine long before that bad PR thing showed Microsoft was harvesting some data. Joe Rogan prior was promoting DDG for awhile to his millions of listeners.
toastercat 3y ago
I like the idea of DDG, but its search results have always been noticeably weaker than Google and even Brave Search these days. As an example, try searching "DuckDNS" on DDG. The homepage is nowhere to be found on the first several pages of DDG, but is rightfully the first result on Google.
- irrational 3y ago
  Personally, I've never had a problem finding what I'm looking for using DDG, but I also have never compared the results on DDG with Google Search.

EmmEff 3y ago

There are other usable browsers… haven’t had Chrome on my machines in literally years.

nicce 3y ago
But you have likely have Chromium based browsers. It takes a lot of work to maintain those if they keep on the old manifest versions.

jchw 3y ago

Hey, this one might actually finally help Firefox's marketshare. Don't get me wrong, I'm not expecting anything massive, but imagine if people's adblockers got disabled over night: a horde of technically-inclined users, being newly-introduced to what the Internet currently is like to use without an adblocker, might just decide it's worth it to switch rather than try Manifest v3 adblockers and find out if it's really good enough. (It is not terrible right now, but really, why bother? It's not as good.)

sys_64738 3y ago

Vivaldi is Chrome without GOOG.

px43 3y ago

This is dumb. Manifest v3 is better than v2. For security, privacy, efficiency, reliability, etc. uBlock origin will work just fine, and be a hell of a lot more efficient using v3. https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/ddkjiahejlhfcafbddmgiahcphecmpfh?pli=1 https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/...

graphe 3y ago
Better for whom? You're just spouting marketing terms like 'reliability' as if v2 wasn't reliable.

preommr 3y ago

Dark times ahead. Firefox is mainly funded by Google, if they've decided to be this aggressive about it, then I am guessing that they've absolved whatever restraint they had and that they're probably going to either force Firefox to follow suit, or cut funding. Neither bodes well for the people's champion in the browser wars.

clouddrover 3y ago

If you care about uBlock Origin then use Firefox. uBlock Origin works best in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

dredmorbius 3y ago
Given Chrome/Android doesn't support extensions at all, and Firefox/Android does, for Android you'd tend to prefer Firefox as your browser regardless. (Or another browser which supports adblocking natively. I use EinkBro (on an e-ink device) most of the time; it has integrated ad-blocking. I believe Brave and Vivaldi will also provide ad-blocking.) Vivaldi: Yep. "Vivaldi Browser on Android | Fast Android browser with Ad blocker" (from page title) <https://vivaldi.com/android/ https://vivaldi.com/android/> Brave: Yep. "Brave Browser is a web browser app that blocks ads, protects your privacy..." <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.browser https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.brave.brow...>

NN88 3y ago

Considering how pro-privacy Apple is, I wonder why Safari’s extensions don’t offer the same level of dexterity Chrome and Firefox do

defensem3ch 3y ago

surprised to see a lack of support for vivaldi. i am a Firefox user and i love it, but vivaldi is also pretty good

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Kye 3y ago

Remember Xkcd 792 from September 2010? https://xkcd.com/792/ https://xkcd.com/792/ It turns out the answer 13 years on really was "make boatloads of money." That's it. That's all they have. They don't know how to innovate anymore. Tightening their grip is the final strategy.

SanjayMehta 3y ago

Firefox works almost all the time and is getting better with every release. For the sites which look for Chrome, there’s Brave.

dev1ycan 3y ago

I am so glad, so glad I was proven right, I knew the second back in like 2009 when I tried chrome and right clicked on a youtube channel background and it didn't let me get the image link unlike firefox that Chrome was an evil that was going to creep to who knows what standards. And here we are, 14 years later, Google finally slowly got its masterplan done, and it will keep getting worse. While I have many grievances with Firefox, there is simply no alternative, the only real alternative is Firefox, don't even give Google the benefit of using chromium, if you truly care switch to Firefox and make everyone else switch, worst case scenario use a chromium alternative but please do not use Chrome anymore, if you are a techie swap everyone you know to an alternative browser.

VMtest 3y ago

off topic, why this reddit URL subdomain is "sh"?

fyrn_ 3y ago

Features lost by the Ublock Origin V3 version by gorehill: - No cosmetic filtering (##) - No scriptlet injection (##+js) - No redirect= filters - No csp= filters - No removeparam= filters This isn't just a oh no we need to rewrite for V3, it's a very user hostile action to take control away from users. Because only Google can be trusted of course.

mmcnl 3y ago
The original source mentions "a new UserScripts API"[0]. [0] https://developer.chrome.com/blog/resuming-the-transition-to-mv3/ https://developer.chrome.com/blog/resuming-the-transition-to...

shmerl 3y ago

Good thing I never bought into Chrome hype. Use Firefox.

dang 3y ago

Related ongoing thread: Google resumes transition to Manifest V3 for Chrome extensions - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409 - Nov 2023 (73 comments)

mimikatz 3y ago

This is actually the best chance Microsoft has to bring Edge back from the dead and make people support using it.

weikju 3y ago
Going from one abusive partner to another will not fix the issue

hexadec 3y ago

This is the inverse of accurate, uBlock Origin already has a MV3 extension in progress (beta at https://ublockorigin.com/ https://ublockorigin.com/ top middle of the page). As others have noted, uBO is not even named in the Google releases, this applies to all MV2 extensions. Annoyed they are barrelling ahead with this still, but not an attack on uBO or ad-blockers directly. Seems like they even made some changes to service workers to enable ad-blockers as well. Perhaps gorhill will weigh in with more comments if he sees this. Curious if any of their changes to MV3 actually moved the needle on the issues previously identified.

ChrisArchitect 3y ago

[dupe] The story is about the Manifest v3 transition, not about uBlock (whether it's included or not. boohoo) Thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38292409

kyriakos 3y ago

Wondering how Microsoft Edge will deal with this. Follow Google?

hiyer 3y ago

I wish FF would implement support for WebAuthN Passkeys so I can use it for work as well :-(

welzel 3y ago

It is the same as with YT anti-adblock: all it does is move people away from Chrome. Chrome had a good run, but it is time again to help family members and organisations to migrate to ... firefox and never look back. Google has lost its ways and i am sure that "don´t do evil" was just replaced by "do evil stuff in a sneaky way".