4 ms·

Which reputable chromium fork will support v2 extensions?

by dvh 2y ago

tao_oat 2y ago
Brave has said that they will: https://x.com/brave/status/1574822799700541446 https://x.com/brave/status/1574822799700541446
- zerof1l 2y ago
  Anything other than Brave? I tried it for a couple of days and went back to Chrome. Brave is so bloated with random crap.
  - langsoul-com 2y ago
    You have to go to settings and disable everything non core browser related. Including their ad blocker. Then add unlock origin. That more or less makes it a good standard chromium browser.
    - lifeinthevoid 2y ago
      I'm not sure I agree, I run Brave with the standard ad blocking (agressive on Youtube though) and it has been smooth sailing, no ads. What's wrong with Brave's ad blocker according to you?
      - langsoul-com 2y ago
        Youtube detects the ad blocker and blocks watching videos. Might have changed now though
    - kaanyalova 2y ago
      Brave uses uBlock filters, you shouldn't see any difference between them, maybe your filters were outdated?
- aryonoco 2y ago
  I think they asked for reputable
  - lifeinthevoid 2y ago
    Can you point to some sources for your claim please, I'm using Brave so I'm interested.
    - MyFedora 2y ago
      https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-browser-no-longer-claims-to-fundraise-on-behalf-of-others-so-thats-nice/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-br... Brave's close association with cryptocurrency and Web 3 is also concerning. Most fraud occurs at the endpoints, not in the middle. While the centralized banking system has mechanisms like chargebacks to address fraud, the crypto space lacks such safeguards. Cryptocurrency has limited real-life utility and is largely sustained by con artists looking to scam people. Once people recognize one scheme as a scam, new crypto concepts, like NFT games, are quickly invented to keep the deception going.
- LogHouse 2y ago
  But will UBO v2 be updated after manifest 3 goes live?
deeringc 2y ago
Any reason it needs to be a chromium fork, and not simply FF?
chrismorgan 2y ago
I would not trust any claims in this direction. Such things don’t tend to last very long or age very well, because the functionality was being removed for a reason, leading to increasingly large portions of the code base diverging, an ever-increasing maintenance burden, and missing out on genuine improvements from upstream. As an example of this sort of thing, consider when Firefox removed XUL extensions (Firefox 57, November 2017). This upset lots of people, and did kill many extensions that just couldn’t exist in the WebExtensions world, and hobble others. But it was done for a reason, and if you compare pre-Quantum and current Firefox you’ll find one of two is faster, more secure and more reliable: and it ain’t the old one. XUL extensions imposed a serious burden and prevented concrete technical improvements. Of course, other changes may have been made that you may or may not like so much (e.g. UI changes), but the removal of XUL/XPCOM has been a good thing for the browser in general. A number of forks retained XUL extensions, but most died fairly quickly because of code base improvements predicated on their removal. There are still a couple around, I think most notably Pale Moon; they’re all now necessarily hard forks. I don’t know what Pale Moon’s more recent web tech feature support is like—I don’t imagine it’s very good, because it can’t take advantage of Firefox’s efforts. https://www.palemoon.org/history.shtml https://www.palemoon.org/history.shtml paints a fairly bleak picture for the future: things have gone badly wrong already, and they admit that the project is in the long term basically untenable as a general web browser. (That entire article is also highly biased in its presentation of the entire thing, fairly heavily anti-Mozilla and anti-browser-vendors-in-general-though-they-frame-it-as-Google.) Such forks also rapidly decay in usefulness in another way: no one makes XUL extensions any more, and probably no one will be making Manifest v2 extensions any more. For a while, the likes of Pale Moon may have allowed you to keep using more extensions, but by now, using Pale Moon means that you get fewer extensions than Firefox, and so they lose their appeal. There are cases where forks succeed in becoming the primary version of the thing; for example, OpenOffice.org has over time essentially died, and its fork LibreOffice has succeeded. MySQL versus MariaDB is mildly similar, though MySQL’s failure is much less stark. There are also cases where forks have succeeded, with divergence of both. There’s even a good one in the web browser world: when Google forked WebKit into Blink. In that case, both engines were improved by the fork, because WebKit had been supporting two different directions to a degree, and now they could pursue their own individual goals with better focus (both were able to remove lots of code), and both had enough investment to survive. Over time, their code bases have become more and more incompatible. —⁂— So… in a few years’ time, probably no reputable Chromium fork will support v2 extensions, and you probably won’t have any reason to want one that does anyway.

Which reputable chromium fork will support v2 extensions?

by dvh 2y ago

Which reputable chromium fork will support v2 extensions?

Brave has said that they will: https://x.com/brave/status/1574822799700541446 https://x.com/brave/status/1574822799700541446

zerof1l 2y ago
Anything other than Brave? I tried it for a couple of days and went back to Chrome. Brave is so bloated with random crap.
- langsoul-com 2y ago
  You have to go to settings and disable everything non core browser related. Including their ad blocker. Then add unlock origin. That more or less makes it a good standard chromium browser.
  - lifeinthevoid 2y ago
    I'm not sure I agree, I run Brave with the standard ad blocking (agressive on Youtube though) and it has been smooth sailing, no ads. What's wrong with Brave's ad blocker according to you?
    - langsoul-com 2y ago
      Youtube detects the ad blocker and blocks watching videos. Might have changed now though
  - kaanyalova 2y ago
    Brave uses uBlock filters, you shouldn't see any difference between them, maybe your filters were outdated?
aryonoco 2y ago
I think they asked for reputable
- lifeinthevoid 2y ago
  Can you point to some sources for your claim please, I'm using Brave so I'm interested.
  - MyFedora 2y ago
    https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-web-browser-is-hijacking-links-and-inserting-affiliate-codes/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2020/06/06/the-brave-we... https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-browser-no-longer-claims-to-fundraise-on-behalf-of-others-so-thats-nice/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2019/01/13/brave-web-br... Brave's close association with cryptocurrency and Web 3 is also concerning. Most fraud occurs at the endpoints, not in the middle. While the centralized banking system has mechanisms like chargebacks to address fraud, the crypto space lacks such safeguards. Cryptocurrency has limited real-life utility and is largely sustained by con artists looking to scam people. Once people recognize one scheme as a scam, new crypto concepts, like NFT games, are quickly invented to keep the deception going.
LogHouse 2y ago
But will UBO v2 be updated after manifest 3 goes live?

deeringc 2y ago

Any reason it needs to be a chromium fork, and not simply FF?

chrismorgan 2y ago

I would not trust any claims in this direction. Such things don’t tend to last very long or age very well, because the functionality was being removed for a reason, leading to increasingly large portions of the code base diverging, an ever-increasing maintenance burden, and missing out on genuine improvements from upstream. As an example of this sort of thing, consider when Firefox removed XUL extensions (Firefox 57, November 2017). This upset lots of people, and did kill many extensions that just couldn’t exist in the WebExtensions world, and hobble others. But it was done for a reason, and if you compare pre-Quantum and current Firefox you’ll find one of two is faster, more secure and more reliable: and it ain’t the old one. XUL extensions imposed a serious burden and prevented concrete technical improvements. Of course, other changes may have been made that you may or may not like so much (e.g. UI changes), but the removal of XUL/XPCOM has been a good thing for the browser in general. A number of forks retained XUL extensions, but most died fairly quickly because of code base improvements predicated on their removal. There are still a couple around, I think most notably Pale Moon; they’re all now necessarily hard forks. I don’t know what Pale Moon’s more recent web tech feature support is like—I don’t imagine it’s very good, because it can’t take advantage of Firefox’s efforts. https://www.palemoon.org/history.shtml https://www.palemoon.org/history.shtml paints a fairly bleak picture for the future: things have gone badly wrong already, and they admit that the project is in the long term basically untenable as a general web browser. (That entire article is also highly biased in its presentation of the entire thing, fairly heavily anti-Mozilla and anti-browser-vendors-in-general-though-they-frame-it-as-Google.) Such forks also rapidly decay in usefulness in another way: no one makes XUL extensions any more, and probably no one will be making Manifest v2 extensions any more. For a while, the likes of Pale Moon may have allowed you to keep using more extensions, but by now, using Pale Moon means that you get fewer extensions than Firefox, and so they lose their appeal. There are cases where forks succeed in becoming the primary version of the thing; for example, OpenOffice.org has over time essentially died, and its fork LibreOffice has succeeded. MySQL versus MariaDB is mildly similar, though MySQL’s failure is much less stark. There are also cases where forks have succeeded, with divergence of both. There’s even a good one in the web browser world: when Google forked WebKit into Blink. In that case, both engines were improved by the fork, because WebKit had been supporting two different directions to a degree, and now they could pursue their own individual goals with better focus (both were able to remove lots of code), and both had enough investment to survive. Over time, their code bases have become more and more incompatible. —⁂— So… in a few years’ time, probably no reputable Chromium fork will support v2 extensions, and you probably won’t have any reason to want one that does anyway.