Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

9to5google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 909 posts

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#271

Post by tedivm »

scarface74 wrote: post #248
tyingq wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Content can still be blocked with extensions" Well, without live heuristics. Chrome ad blocking is basically now limited to a dumb, limited list of URI patterns. Better than nothing, but much less capable than before.

And without privacy invasion implications. Apple introduced content blocking 4 versions ago implemented nearly the same way. No one would accuse Apple of trying to help Google make more money.

Every application has privacy implications, and it isn't difficult to manage this one. Having a giant warning around installing extensions with this level of access would be a good way to protect people while also allowing them to make their own decisions.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#272

Post by tyingq »

scarface74 wrote: post #248
tyingq wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Content can still be blocked with extensions" Well, without live heuristics. Chrome ad blocking is basically now limited to a dumb, limited list of URI patterns. Better than nothing, but much less capable than before.

And without privacy invasion implications. Apple introduced content blocking 4 versions ago implemented nearly the same way. No one would accuse Apple of trying to help Google make more money.

Google didn't remove any of the observational capabilities of the API.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#275

Post by Causality1 »

shadofx wrote: post #124
Causality1 wrote: post #60

Ugh. Now I'm going to have to switch my passel of family members, neighbors, and friends who rely on me for tech support over to Firefox. Not that Firefox isn't going the same way eventually. Firefox crippled the ability for real customization with Firefox 57 and it's only gotten worse since then.

Pale Moon exists if you want the old school Firefox add-in capabilities

It'd be lovely if I could get the speed of Firefox Quantum while still being able to put the damn tabs and address bar wherever I want them.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#276

Post by justinrlle »

fourthark wrote: post #214
microcolonel wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink Chromium is generally fine, until Google packages it as Chrome. The issues are not inherent to Chromium, they're failures of principle at Google. I know people like the idea, in concept, of engine diversity on the web, but the alternatives are terrible. Anyone who says that Firefox runs anywhere near as well as Chrom…

+1 for your first point - surely Chromium can still be used to create an ad-blocking browser. I disagree with you after there.

My understanding is that this change in the extensions API will land in Chromium first, and so any browser depending on the extension mechanism of Chromium will be impacted, like Opera and Vivaldi. If I'm not guessing wrong, Opera and Vivaldi are compatible with Chrome extensions because they use the extension mechanism of Chromium, so they'll need additional maintenance burden to keep the `webRequest` API working.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#277

Post by renlo »

Might be a silly question, but is the block list per extension or is it a global block list? Ie, if each extension can have 30k rules, and the current block list requires 70k rules, could there be 3 extensions, 2 with 30k rules and 1 with 10k rules? This would surely be an inconvenience, just wondering

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#279

Post by ljm »

Klonoar wrote: post #189
ljm wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that true? IE was incumbent and Firefox unseated it. They had the legacy of Netscape, sure, but they didn’t throw the towel and reskin IE the same way other browsers of the time did. Besides that, at which point does the dominant search and advertising company of the internet get an antitrust case for this? People think google is trustworthy yet they do nothing to earn that trust.

This kinda erases history. IE was riddled with security flaws and stagnant beyond belief when Firefox usurped it. There was a compelling reason to use an IE alternative back then - they actually offered something IE couldn't give. Chrome doesn't have that problem.

Do these changes make Google less stagnant, as they disempower the discerning user who wants at least some control over their browsing experience?

Google's new security flaw is that they are going to moderate ad-blocking, become responsible for it, and then depend on their inhuman machine to ignore all of your complaints. No different to how you can't find a human connect when you get screwed out of Gmail or Google Wallet because of their mathematics.

As a total thought experiment on where I'm coming from with this: in Star Trek TNG, Data (the Android) spends seven years with us exploring the human equation. Strip out the narrative imbalance and do you think the current automation of help and support is anywhere near aligned to the ideals of that 30 year old TV show that didn't know better? Or is the algorithm an overfitting to Google's commercial needs?

It's tangential to this thread but for some reason it felt worth writing out.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#280

Post by jerieljan »

teh_klev wrote: post #205
irrational wrote: post #85

I don't get it. I've used Firefox and Chrome for years. Firefox is easily as good and capable as Chrome. The barrier to switch from Chrome to Firefox is almost non-existent. Is Google counting on the majority of people not being knowledgeable enough or motivated enough to switch browsers?

Firefox isn't quite there. How about a sane Profile manager? This is something I use heavily on Chrome. The "about:profiles" UI doesn't cut it. Also when I use Firefox on my non-work Fedora machines (and this is going from Fedora 21 to 29) it seriously chews up memory and CPU. Facebook (yeah, I know) is rendered unusable after about 30 mins. And as other post(s) have pointed out, video playback can be a bit janky. Th…

> How about a sane Profile manager? This is something I use heavily on Chrome. The "about:profiles" UI doesn't cut it.

What's your thoughts on Multi-Account Containers? I think it's better to use if your use case for multiple profiles is to keep sessions separate (i.e., keeping work and personal logins to clearly identifiable tabs / windows)

It's not as thorough compared to switching entire profiles but sometimes the above is sufficient. (ex: your history, add-ons and bookmarks are still under the same profile)

Post reply on HN