Google Chrome's uBlock Origin phaseout has begun(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Google Chrome's uBlock Origin phaseout has begun
https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/15/24270981/google-chrome-ublock-origin-phaseout-manifest-v3-ad-blocker
37 comments
HN is mostly developers. Why is there no palpable backlash against this? Security?! Have we fallen for that crap again?
If there's one place on the whole internet where it should begin taking shape, it's here. It's kinda sad. While I admire fellow Firefox users, 2% marketshare leaves no dent in Chrome's brutal dominance.
Has google really pushed chrome so far down our throats that there's no hope of destroying its monopoly?
If there's one place on the whole internet where it should begin taking shape, it's here. It's kinda sad. While I admire fellow Firefox users, 2% marketshare leaves no dent in Chrome's brutal dominance.
Has google really pushed chrome so far down our throats that there's no hope of destroying its monopoly?
I use Firefox, but I'm concerned that this move will change the narrative around the use of adblockers. Chrome is so dominant that if you have to go download a browser like Firefox with such a low market share, installing an adblocker can more easily be cast as something only techies who want to "pirate the web" do.
It will increase Firefox's market share. How much remains to be seen.
I agree that it will increase Firefox's market share in the short term, but I'm concerned it will decrease the number of people using adblockers in the long run by adding friction to the process. I would expect most Chrome users on HN to switch to Firefox after this, but I wouldn't expect people outside of techie circles to make that move en masse.
Irony is that this article is hosted on a page overrun by ads
On mobile I only see 8 ads between the text. Not really annoying like sticky ads.
If the rest of the Internet would be like this it would acceptable for me.
Most of the time the internet is more like fandom sticky ads bottom and top that plays videos or x that are so small that you click on the ads.
Most of the time the internet is more like fandom sticky ads bottom and top that plays videos or x that are so small that you click on the ads.
The issue with ads is not just the fact that they prey on your attention, but also that they're a well-known vector for malware. You should never accept ads, because the risk that matters most to you if you don't have good mental hygiene is your person (i.e. identity theft, financial damage).
Yes, but it's the only way that keeps the internet alive.
I like the old school internet years ago where everyone put effort in websites as a hobby, but this was another time and good websites deserve making money.
I like the old school internet years ago where everyone put effort in websites as a hobby, but this was another time and good websites deserve making money.
Your point is apparently "you should expose yourself to malware so other people can make money". I think this is an unethical thing to say and think, because you are harming the actual human beings around you.
Opera on mobile is perfect with the built-in ad blocker. Its the only browser on mobile I use, and have gotten several family members and friends to use.
Time to phaseout google chrome
I've noticed that Chrome logs me out of the Google account a lot due to an error. It is really annoying. Could it be because I have uBlock installed?
[deleted]
Firefox is looking more appealing now.
I've been using Firefox mainly, for A few years, since Google started earnestly talking about removing support for manifest V3.
I only use Chrome for compatibility reasons. Than I switch back over to Firefox.
Challenges are separating myself from the synchronized data universe that is the Google ecosystem. Passwords etc.
Definitely possible. Definitely worthwhile to retain control over my time.
I only use Chrome for compatibility reasons. Than I switch back over to Firefox.
Challenges are separating myself from the synchronized data universe that is the Google ecosystem. Passwords etc.
Definitely possible. Definitely worthwhile to retain control over my time.
Firefox is a attempt to placate the original citizens of the web whos tools subvert the add surveillance industry .Google is clever enough to know how full blown antagonism to developers ends up. Oh and monopoly laws.
Issue with firefox : zero support for WebUSB!
It was always the correct option, it's a shame it's taken people like yourself so long to get the memo.
It's a shame Firefox sold it's homepage to promote a shitty race-dividing movie, claim social activism, and has forever lost its reputation.
We don't trust google, but it never lied. Firefox lied.
We don't trust google, but it never lied. Firefox lied.
> it never lied
It's motto was literally "don't be evil". It takes a significant mental leap to take your conclusion from it's behaviour.
It's motto was literally "don't be evil". It takes a significant mental leap to take your conclusion from it's behaviour.
>significant mental leap
If I cared that much about every online drama I wouldn't be able to use any technology or web service without going insane.
I'm against monopolies & ads and I don't need to watch every movie, so that's an easy choice.
I'm against monopolies & ads and I don't need to watch every movie, so that's an easy choice.
I'm against all those things as well - the only notable difference being that security lapses in the name of "social activism", in a leading browser than millions depend on for more than they should, is simply not permissible to me and many others.
The also impossible delineation between "socially activist ad" and "politically convenient" one make it a tainted resource, both security-wise, and bias-wise.
It is a organization, with no integrity; merely another institutional-preserving husk
The also impossible delineation between "socially activist ad" and "politically convenient" one make it a tainted resource, both security-wise, and bias-wise.
It is a organization, with no integrity; merely another institutional-preserving husk
What lie did Firefox do? Nothing listed in the examples sounds like a lie
Is there a good alternative to uBlock in Chrome? Sadly I’m obliged to use it for aspects of my job.
I’ve been using Slimjet (chromium based) for a while now, it has a built-in ad blocker that works pretty good. What about “developer mode” in chrome have anyone tried to see if ublock works that way?
uBlock in Firefox
As the problem is chrome and not ublock
As the problem is chrome and not ublock
That's not what I asked, so not a particularly helpful comment given the context of my message.
That may not be what you intended, but that is what you asked.
It looks like you intended "is there a good alternative to uBlock in Chrome", but what you asked can just as well be interpreted as "is there a good alternative to uBlock in Chrome."
It looks like you intended "is there a good alternative to uBlock in Chrome", but what you asked can just as well be interpreted as "is there a good alternative to uBlock in Chrome."
[deleted]
It's the only actual answer though; adblocking requires permissions that chrome is removing, and you won't get something useful out of chrome
Good bye Ublock Origin... oh wait, pardon the typo. Good bye, Chrome.
More discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41809698
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41757178