4 ms·

I am upset for the common users of Chrome. This change is awful for them. But any Chrome users here? Any Chrome users reading this comment? You knew, or sh

I am upset for the common users of Chrome. This change is awful for them. But any Chrome users here? Any Chrome users reading this comment? You knew, or should have known, that Google is a snake. You willfully chose to use a browser developed by an advertising company. You've known Firefox was an alternative but you willfully chose not to use it because you placed mild convenience ("Ooooh but chrome is milliseconds faster") before your freedom. You get what you fucking deserve.

stranded22 3y ago
Firefox is also implementing manifest v3, as per article. I think this should push people towards DNS level blocking (I use nextdns, personally)
- kome 3y ago
  yes but: "What are we doing differently in Firefox? WebRequest One of the most controversial changes of Chrome’s MV3 approach is the removal of blocking WebRequest, which provides a level of power and flexibility that is critical to enabling advanced privacy and content blocking features. Unfortunately, that power has also been used to harm users in a variety of ways. Chrome’s solution in MV3 was to define a more narrowly scoped API (declarativeNetRequest) as a replacement. However, this will limit the capabilities of certain types of privacy extensions without adequate replacement. Mozilla will maintain support for blocking WebRequest in MV3. To maximize compatibility with other browsers, we will also ship support for declarativeNetRequest. We will continue to work with content blockers and other key consumers of this API to identify current and future alternatives where appropriate. Content blocking is one of the most important use cases for extensions, and we are committed to ensuring that Firefox users have access to the best privacy tools available." 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...
  - stranded22 3y ago
    Excellent, thank you
  - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
    firefox always copies chrome so they will drop it eventually. Telemetry will say "few people use it" so some asshole(s) will remove it.
    - kome 3y ago
      at this point people use firefox to access to the full power of ublock origins, and that's not gonna change. trust me bro :)
      - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
        "Is this an out of season april fool's joke?" Seriously, are you trying to kid me?
  - _Algernon_ 3y ago
    Just like they promised to reimplement replacements for XUL extensions almost a decade ago. Still waiting for feature parity.
    - zlg_codes 3y ago
      This event still pisses me off. WebExtensions are straight worse than the XUL we had before. I wish Mozilla would stand up for their vision of the Web instead of being Google's controlled opposition.
- bad_user 3y ago
  DNS-level blocking is very easy to circumvent. Honestly, the reason most ad-blocking works is because publishers haven't bothered with banning it. And that's because power is concentrated with Big Tech that makes a lot of profit already. E.g., by blocking ads on YouTube, people are now surprised that there's no alternative left, and now Google can milk those users, too.
- hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
  Is DNS blocking effective because it’s hard to not use DNS at scale, or because advertisers don’t care about the very small portion of users using it? I’m asking because it seems to be a flimsy defence, even if it’s currently working well.
- flir 3y ago
  That won't work for ads and content being served from the same domain. Isn't the ultimate answer in this arms race a web proxy? I'm wondering about a two-part architecture. One part in the browser that can inspect the rendered page, and another part between the browser and the outside world, that can block individual elements. Basically re-implement the Web Request API as a web proxy. For locked-down environments where you can't run a local proxy, the proxy could be an external service.
- kibwen 3y ago
  Firefox is implementing it for compatibility with Chrome extensions, but crucially it's not removing support for the old manifest format.
- crabbone 3y ago
  I just discovered that before I had uBlock Origin, I, apparently, was adding ad website domains to my /etc/hosts by hand :D (And forgot about it, just remembered that I copied my old disk to the one I have now in my laptop, but forgot to add it to fstab). Not a robust solution by any means, but very easy to implement.
- Shorel 3y ago
  I use a giant hosts file. It makes me hate the work laptop where I can't use it, and any adblocker is just an inferior experience.
bad_user 3y ago
Firefox still sucks though.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  [flagged]
- pbjtime 3y ago
  Elaborate
  - bad_user 3y ago
    OK, I'm typing this comment on Firefox for Android BTW, so I keep trying to like it. Here's my current annoyances: – on Android, scrolling and performance is very poor on certain websites, on a high end phone; this including Mastodon, and my report was dismissed; – on Android, the UI has issues detecting between light and dark modes at the system level; it has other obvious bugs, too, that are reported but remain unfixed; – poor integration with the OS for player controls; both Android and desktop (macOS); - unreliable HDR support; in macOS it works, but I sometimes get flicker, and it might get disabled if the viewport is small; - poor battery life on macOS; this used to be true for Chromium as well, ans Safari is king obviously, but lately Chromium has an edge over Firefox; – incompatibility with certain online apps, like MS Teams; in fairness they worked hard to fix Meetup at least; – poor PWA support, no SSB; on both desktop and Android. I prefer PWAs to Electron variants: better sandboxing, use of browser extensions, often better memory use; see: https://howfuguismybrowser.dev/ https://howfuguismybrowser.dev/ – no customizable keyboard shortcuts and poor accessibility preventing OS-level solutions; in macOS I can set shortcuts for Chrome, for various Tab actions, like Pin Tab or Close Others. And Brave/Vivaldi have customization built into their settings; — poor extensions security: for LanguageTool or Google Translate I'd like the "Click to Enable" option or the ability to disable by default or enable per-hostname; – unusable profiles – in Chrome different profiles have different history and extensions, so for security purposes they are above Firefox's containers; I actually don't get the point of Containers at all, being useful only for logging into multiple AWS accounts, otherwise they have no privacy or security benefits; --- Firefox does have certain advantages. They aren't enough to keep me using it, though. But in the interest of fairness: + History sync actually works; + DNS-Over-HTTPS works with fallback to system; + Tree-style-tabs; + Better bookmark management; + Reader view (Android & desktop); + Ctrl+Tab; + Non-admin upgrades; + uBlock Origin; + Total Cookie Protection; + Android: multiple search engines; + Android: Open in app; + Android: Dark reader / uBlock Origin / other extensions;
masto 3y ago
Yes, Chrome user here. I'm sure I'm not the only one, but who wants to raise their hand when surrounded by a mob out for blood? It's just a web browser, I don't think the aggressive and violent language is necessary. What, exactly, do I "fucking deserve"?
- fsflover 3y ago
  > What, exactly, do I "fucking deserve"? It's just not a good idea to let Google hold the keys to anti-tracking tech. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38303956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38303956
kelnos 3y ago
Hear, hear. I see so many people on HN complaining about ads and about how Google has a monopoly on search and does a bunch of shady things. And yet so many of them are Chrome users. I really don't think you have standing to complain about Google's practices when it comes to privacy or anti-competitiveness if you use Chrome. It's the height of hypocrisy. And I say this as someone who still uses quite a few Google services. I've managed to get myself off GMail, but it's been a lot harder to ditch the office apps, and Photos.

stranded22 3y ago

Firefox is also implementing manifest v3, as per article. I think this should push people towards DNS level blocking (I use nextdns, personally)

kome 3y ago
yes but: "What are we doing differently in Firefox? WebRequest One of the most controversial changes of Chrome’s MV3 approach is the removal of blocking WebRequest, which provides a level of power and flexibility that is critical to enabling advanced privacy and content blocking features. Unfortunately, that power has also been used to harm users in a variety of ways. Chrome’s solution in MV3 was to define a more narrowly scoped API (declarativeNetRequest) as a replacement. However, this will limit the capabilities of certain types of privacy extensions without adequate replacement. Mozilla will maintain support for blocking WebRequest in MV3. To maximize compatibility with other browsers, we will also ship support for declarativeNetRequest. We will continue to work with content blockers and other key consumers of this API to identify current and future alternatives where appropriate. Content blocking is one of the most important use cases for extensions, and we are committed to ensuring that Firefox users have access to the best privacy tools available." 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...
- stranded22 3y ago
  Excellent, thank you
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
  firefox always copies chrome so they will drop it eventually. Telemetry will say "few people use it" so some asshole(s) will remove it.
  - kome 3y ago
    at this point people use firefox to access to the full power of ublock origins, and that's not gonna change. trust me bro :)
    - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
      "Is this an out of season april fool's joke?" Seriously, are you trying to kid me?
- _Algernon_ 3y ago
  Just like they promised to reimplement replacements for XUL extensions almost a decade ago. Still waiting for feature parity.
  - zlg_codes 3y ago
    This event still pisses me off. WebExtensions are straight worse than the XUL we had before. I wish Mozilla would stand up for their vision of the Web instead of being Google's controlled opposition.
bad_user 3y ago
DNS-level blocking is very easy to circumvent. Honestly, the reason most ad-blocking works is because publishers haven't bothered with banning it. And that's because power is concentrated with Big Tech that makes a lot of profit already. E.g., by blocking ads on YouTube, people are now surprised that there's no alternative left, and now Google can milk those users, too.
hsbauauvhabzb 3y ago
Is DNS blocking effective because it’s hard to not use DNS at scale, or because advertisers don’t care about the very small portion of users using it? I’m asking because it seems to be a flimsy defence, even if it’s currently working well.
flir 3y ago
That won't work for ads and content being served from the same domain. Isn't the ultimate answer in this arms race a web proxy? I'm wondering about a two-part architecture. One part in the browser that can inspect the rendered page, and another part between the browser and the outside world, that can block individual elements. Basically re-implement the Web Request API as a web proxy. For locked-down environments where you can't run a local proxy, the proxy could be an external service.
kibwen 3y ago
Firefox is implementing it for compatibility with Chrome extensions, but crucially it's not removing support for the old manifest format.
crabbone 3y ago
I just discovered that before I had uBlock Origin, I, apparently, was adding ad website domains to my /etc/hosts by hand :D (And forgot about it, just remembered that I copied my old disk to the one I have now in my laptop, but forgot to add it to fstab). Not a robust solution by any means, but very easy to implement.
Shorel 3y ago
I use a giant hosts file. It makes me hate the work laptop where I can't use it, and any adblocker is just an inferior experience.

bad_user 3y ago

Firefox still sucks though.

mcpackieh 3y ago
[flagged]
pbjtime 3y ago
Elaborate
- bad_user 3y ago
  OK, I'm typing this comment on Firefox for Android BTW, so I keep trying to like it. Here's my current annoyances: – on Android, scrolling and performance is very poor on certain websites, on a high end phone; this including Mastodon, and my report was dismissed; – on Android, the UI has issues detecting between light and dark modes at the system level; it has other obvious bugs, too, that are reported but remain unfixed; – poor integration with the OS for player controls; both Android and desktop (macOS); - unreliable HDR support; in macOS it works, but I sometimes get flicker, and it might get disabled if the viewport is small; - poor battery life on macOS; this used to be true for Chromium as well, ans Safari is king obviously, but lately Chromium has an edge over Firefox; – incompatibility with certain online apps, like MS Teams; in fairness they worked hard to fix Meetup at least; – poor PWA support, no SSB; on both desktop and Android. I prefer PWAs to Electron variants: better sandboxing, use of browser extensions, often better memory use; see: https://howfuguismybrowser.dev/ https://howfuguismybrowser.dev/ – no customizable keyboard shortcuts and poor accessibility preventing OS-level solutions; in macOS I can set shortcuts for Chrome, for various Tab actions, like Pin Tab or Close Others. And Brave/Vivaldi have customization built into their settings; — poor extensions security: for LanguageTool or Google Translate I'd like the "Click to Enable" option or the ability to disable by default or enable per-hostname; – unusable profiles – in Chrome different profiles have different history and extensions, so for security purposes they are above Firefox's containers; I actually don't get the point of Containers at all, being useful only for logging into multiple AWS accounts, otherwise they have no privacy or security benefits; --- Firefox does have certain advantages. They aren't enough to keep me using it, though. But in the interest of fairness: + History sync actually works; + DNS-Over-HTTPS works with fallback to system; + Tree-style-tabs; + Better bookmark management; + Reader view (Android & desktop); + Ctrl+Tab; + Non-admin upgrades; + uBlock Origin; + Total Cookie Protection; + Android: multiple search engines; + Android: Open in app; + Android: Dark reader / uBlock Origin / other extensions;

masto 3y ago

Yes, Chrome user here. I'm sure I'm not the only one, but who wants to raise their hand when surrounded by a mob out for blood? It's just a web browser, I don't think the aggressive and violent language is necessary. What, exactly, do I "fucking deserve"?

fsflover 3y ago
> What, exactly, do I "fucking deserve"? It's just not a good idea to let Google hold the keys to anti-tracking tech. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38303956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38303956

kelnos 3y ago

Hear, hear. I see so many people on HN complaining about ads and about how Google has a monopoly on search and does a bunch of shady things. And yet so many of them are Chrome users. I really don't think you have standing to complain about Google's practices when it comes to privacy or anti-competitiveness if you use Chrome. It's the height of hypocrisy. And I say this as someone who still uses quite a few Google services. I've managed to get myself off GMail, but it's been a lot harder to ditch the office apps, and Photos.