Live data from Hacker News

Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

zdnet.com

41–50 of 256 posts

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#41
post #19
post #17

This one[1] and the likes will prevent vast majority of ads, regardless of which browser you have chosen to use this morning. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/h...

Except mobile browsers, arguably the most critical place where you need blocking to get any kind of reasonably decent experience (load times, viewable area, battery life, etc.). Extensions like uBlock target people who don't want to bother with editing hosts files and keeping them updated.

Firefox on Android supports extensions, including uBlockO, and it works perfectly. It can be set as the default browser and voilà, no more ads ever.

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#42
The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in.

The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers mostly rely on the Chrome Extension store. If Google really decides to pull the plug here they could start rejecting extensions using the old, removed-from-Chrome APIs. And then what? Each browser such as Vivaldi, Brave, Opera has to implement their own app store just to host the old-API ad-blockers. And implementing such a store is a major feat. And the walled garden strikes again.

Vivaldi already indicated they might create a "limited" store, meaning not a real store open to the public, but one where they list hand-picked old-API extensions such as ublock origin. Of course, innovation is still stiffed as you in such a "chrome-store + limited vendor store" scenario cannot just develop new extensions using the old-API because you'd have no chance of getting listed in the chrome store, and essentially no chance in the hand-picked limited vendor ones.

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#43
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A chromium fork named Kiwi supports extensions on Android! Thanks to this I can play youtube music in the background and have the fastest possible browser on Android. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.kiwibrowse...

> The browser is not fully open source like open in open source. It is a common myth and misconception about Kiwi Browser. https://github.com/kiwibrowser/android/issues/30 There's NewPipe at F-Droid for youtube music in the background and so much more.

Yep, but it's not only Kiwi. There is zero full open-source Chromium browsers for now (with reproducible builds, that's why no Chromium on F-Droid)

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#44
post #19
post #17

This one[1] and the likes will prevent vast majority of ads, regardless of which browser you have chosen to use this morning. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/h...

Except mobile browsers, arguably the most critical place where you need blocking to get any kind of reasonably decent experience (load times, viewable area, battery life, etc.). Extensions like uBlock target people who don't want to bother with editing hosts files and keeping them updated.

On iOS, you can use DNSCloak[1] which has recently been open-sourced[2]. You can either setup a DNS server (DoH or dnscrypt) somewhere that include these filters, or you can use in-app Blacklist functionality to block domain (although it needs domains only-type of block file, instead of host file, but converting them is quiet trivial).

[1]: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/dnscloak-secure-dns-client/i...

[2]: https://github.com/s-s/dnscloak

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#45
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is probably still a legacy mix of XUL, cpp and migrating to rust. I'm pretty sure chrome is easier to adapt.

XUL was replaced quite some time ago.

XUL is not supported for extensions now, but has Firefox's UI really been fully rewritten in HTML yet?

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#46

The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in. The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers most…

You can install extensions manually. You have to be able to because otherwise you wouldn't be able to develop new ones.

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use such a host file on my android. There's even apps to manage them. Needs a rooted device though. That has the added benefit of removing ads in all apps, because when they can't be loaded, generally not even the empty widget shows.

You can use Blokada who block with DNS system without rooting.

That uses a VPN internally though, which comes with a decent amount of overhead.

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#48

I tried opera a while back, and while it's fast and looks good, it has a new tab page with "recommended" sites that you can't turn off - I tried, but it's protected by DRM (opera will refuse to start if the file doesn't have a valid digital signature). So if I'm going to switch browsers because of privacy/advertising concerns, it's not going to be Opera.

Current Opera doesn't even allow to customize mouse gestures. The browser that once prided itself in its feature richness...

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#49

The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in. The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers most…

Walled gardens for extensions is also a big problem. Maybe web browsers will finally be forced to give up that control because of all this. Personally I would like at least user freedom to choose extension stores for themselves.

Re: Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

#50
post #10

I feel like things would be easier if Firefox could be embeded in another browser just like chromium can. Let Google cripple their browser for themselves, and Mozilla provide the good and strong de facto browser engine.

> Let Google cripple their browser for themselves

Web developers can also help here by making the UX slightly worse for Chrome users, e.g. by showing more ads.

Post reply on HN