4 ms·

>JPEG-XL seemed like the next logical step until Google took their toys and killed it despite already having the support in Chrome, Why would I ever care about

>JPEG-XL seemed like the next logical step until Google took their toys and killed it despite already having the support in Chrome, Why would I ever care about Chrome? I can't use adblockers on Chrome, which makes the internet even less usable than it currently is. I only start up chrome to bypass cross-origin restrictions when I need to monkey-patch javascript to download things websites try to keep me from downloading (or, like when I need to scrape from a Google website... javascript scraper bots seem to evade their bot detection perfectly, just finished downloading a few hundred gigabytes of magazines off of Google Books). Seriously, fuck Chrome. We're less than 2 years away from things being as bad as they were in the IE6 years.

codazoda 1y ago
I think we're there, not 2 years away. I have software that won't work quite right in Safari or Firefox through a VPN every single day. Maybe it's the VPN and maybe it's the browser but it doesn't matter. We're at IE levels it's just ever so slightly more subtle this time. I'm still using alternatives but it's a battle.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
  VPN's layer 2... I suppose it could be resizing packets in such as way as to make it glitch out, but that just seems improbable. Some of the warez sites I download torrents from have captchas and other javascripticles that only work on Chrome, but I've yet to see it with mainstream sites. Fight the good fight.
  - frollogaston 1y ago
    The VPN could be on an IP address with a bad reputation that's getting soft-blocked by some stuff
crazygringo 1y ago
> I can't use adblockers on Chrome Why does this myth persist? uBlock Origin Lite works perfectly fine on Chrome, with the new Manifest v3. Blocks basically all the ads uBlock Origin did previously, including YouTube. But it uses less resources so pages load even faster. There's an argument that adblocking could theoretically become less effective in the future but we haven't seen any evidence of that yet. So you can very much use adblockers on Chrome.
- frollogaston 1y ago
  If uBO Lite is really better, why does uBO exist?
  - crazygringo 1y ago
    Because uBO Lite uses a newer Chrome function call (declarativeNetRequest) that didn't exist previously (original uBO was based on webRequest). webRequest is slower because it has to evaluate JavaScript for each request (as well as the overhead of interprocess communication), instead of the blocking being done by compiled C++ code in the same process like declarativeNetRequest does. uBO also has a bunch of extra features like zapping that the creator explicitly chose not to include in uBO Lite, in the interests of making the Lite version as fast and resource-light as possible. For zapping, there are other extensions you can install instead if you need that. They're two different products with two different philosophies based on two different underlying architectures. The older architecture has now gone away in Chrome, but the new one supports uBlock Origin Lite great.
    - frollogaston 1y ago
      Thanks, I'll try it out then.
    - pikelet 1y ago
      I think you're overstating it a bit. There were definitely features that couldn't be implemented due to MV3 limitations rather than because the developer chose to leave them out. https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
      - frollogaston 1y ago
        Hm, I can't tell how serious these limitations are, but there are a lot, and this one stands out: replace=, can't modify the response body (full support is only possible with Firefox MV2)

codazoda 1y ago

I think we're there, not 2 years away. I have software that won't work quite right in Safari or Firefox through a VPN every single day. Maybe it's the VPN and maybe it's the browser but it doesn't matter. We're at IE levels it's just ever so slightly more subtle this time. I'm still using alternatives but it's a battle.

NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
VPN's layer 2... I suppose it could be resizing packets in such as way as to make it glitch out, but that just seems improbable. Some of the warez sites I download torrents from have captchas and other javascripticles that only work on Chrome, but I've yet to see it with mainstream sites. Fight the good fight.
- frollogaston 1y ago
  The VPN could be on an IP address with a bad reputation that's getting soft-blocked by some stuff

crazygringo 1y ago

> I can't use adblockers on Chrome Why does this myth persist? uBlock Origin Lite works perfectly fine on Chrome, with the new Manifest v3. Blocks basically all the ads uBlock Origin did previously, including YouTube. But it uses less resources so pages load even faster. There's an argument that adblocking could theoretically become less effective in the future but we haven't seen any evidence of that yet. So you can very much use adblockers on Chrome.

frollogaston 1y ago
If uBO Lite is really better, why does uBO exist?
- crazygringo 1y ago
  Because uBO Lite uses a newer Chrome function call (declarativeNetRequest) that didn't exist previously (original uBO was based on webRequest). webRequest is slower because it has to evaluate JavaScript for each request (as well as the overhead of interprocess communication), instead of the blocking being done by compiled C++ code in the same process like declarativeNetRequest does. uBO also has a bunch of extra features like zapping that the creator explicitly chose not to include in uBO Lite, in the interests of making the Lite version as fast and resource-light as possible. For zapping, there are other extensions you can install instead if you need that. They're two different products with two different philosophies based on two different underlying architectures. The older architecture has now gone away in Chrome, but the new one supports uBlock Origin Lite great.
  - frollogaston 1y ago
    Thanks, I'll try it out then.
  - pikelet 1y ago
    I think you're overstating it a bit. There were definitely features that couldn't be implemented due to MV3 limitations rather than because the developer chose to leave them out. https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
    - frollogaston 1y ago
      Hm, I can't tell how serious these limitations are, but there are a lot, and this one stands out: replace=, can't modify the response body (full support is only possible with Firefox MV2)