5 ms·
Sure, but in the context of a headline/submission title, "Google confirms they will disable uBlock Origin" strongly implies that Google mentioned uBO by name, w
by spondylosaurus 3y ago
Sure, but in the context of a headline/submission title, "Google confirms they will disable uBlock Origin" strongly implies that Google mentioned uBO by name, which they did not. The news articles that the Reddit post links to have more general headlines for that reason.
Plus, for me at least, there are plenty of other extensions I'd like to continue using, not just uBO :(
- Lammy 3y agoThere is zero chance that Google as an organization are unaware of uBO and of how their changes will affect uBO.
- addicted 3y agoThere’s a significant difference between: - Google blocks uBlock Origin - Google EOLs manifest v2 extensions So whether a consequence of #2 is #1 doesn’t change the fact that #1 and #2 as headlines mean different things and imply very different ideas around the scope and intention of the action.
- dcow 3y agoYes, but the title of the Reddit thread is the title used here, so that complicates the situation. The title is accurate and not editorialized in that context. People are talking about it because of the effects on uBlock origin. Nobody at large cares that Google is finally pulling the plug on v2 extensions.
- iowemoretohim 3y ago> The title is accurate and not editorialized in that context. So long as you treat the Reddit thread as a primary source which in this case it's clearly not.
- dcow 3y agoWhile we avoid low quality re-print/syndication, it is normal to submit and discuss secondary commentary on HN. Think of all the “X did Y, here is why it matters” style blog posts.
- nsonha 3y agoI think that is some lousy excuse for lying