Mozilla and Google Chrome Refuse to Support Gab’s Dissenter Extension

Both browsers offer sideloaded extensions as well as open source cores that can be set to use their own stores.

While troubling that they have such ability, they make their terms of use clear and do offer motivated users the ability to chose alternative plugin sources.

Why are people assuming this is only usable by alt-right, hitleresque people? This is a fantastic tool for users to 'dissent' locked wikipedia articles, political posts on news sites, and perhaps is a better version of twitter itself.

It is evident megacorps are manufacturing consent on a colossal scale - tools like this become critical and necessary for freedom of speech. I just can't comprehend the want for people to shut down discourse.

You think they're going to disappear and change their opinion or is it more likely they become radicalised at a world which won't even provide a platform for discussion?

It makes perfect sense. If you create tools to ban certain types of speech, say intolerance of homophobia, what happens when a homophobe acquires those tools?

Because any tool will be eventually misused and abused.

Neither browser allows sideloaded extensions in its standard build:

Chrome:

> As of Chrome 33, no external installs are allowed from a path to a local .crx on Windows (see Protecting Windows users from malicious extensions). As of Chrome 44, no external installs are allowed from a path to a local .crx on Mac (see Continuing to protect Chrome users from malicious extensions).

https://developer.chrome.com/apps/external_extensions

Firefox:

> What are my options if I want to install unsigned extensions in Firefox?

> The Nightly and Developer Edition versions of Firefox have a preference to disable signature enforcement.

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing