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

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

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 256 posts

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

#211

Post by EdwardDiego »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #172
negamax wrote: post #146

Damn Google! This is so short sighted. People/everyone just installed Chrome on whatever systems they could find and that's how Chrome become so prevalent. Not because it was a superior product, not because of technology but because everyone was anti IE. Google is painting Chrome into similar corner. In a way, this is a good indicator of decline of Google. Revenue not through innovation but by coercion

Because anti-IE? I doubt it was the driving motive for much people. People usually switch to something because it's better or at least because it's cool and popular. I switched to Opera because it was so much better than anything in 2000. Then I tried Firefox because a friend switched to it and I sticked with it occasionally as it was becoming better and better and cool extensions emerged. Then I switched to Chrome b…

Why not try Opera again? As the joke goes, both Opera users are happy.

You can even run Chrome extensions if you install this extension: https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/install-chrom...

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

#212

Post by josh2600 »

r00fus wrote: post #210
ben_jones wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its gotten to the point where power users go around to all their non-power-user friends and install ad blockers for them, at least I do in our office. The reason this is so successful is because it takes 5 seconds to go the the chrome store and add ublock origin. Convincing my non-power-user friends to move to firefox would be significantly harder. Google's goal is to remove the severity (and effectively the…

This had been happening for a decade or more based on anecdotal evidence - so much so that I had to double-check then change my intranet app at a previous smaller company (2008). The new thing is Google valuing their profits over the wishes of a large population of their users.

This hits the nail on the head.

This is how big companies lose their way and get eaten by smaller companies. We all think Google is invincible because of their technological monopoly, but the problem of having to grow forever due to the way public markets work necessitates product evolution or squeezing blood from the stone. The real monopoly is philosophy, not technology, and it's so, so, so easy to lose the logos/pathos/eros high ground (and thus the philosophical war).

In Google's case, their innovation has never been able to eclipse their original sin: advertising. As long as your god is ads, you will make compromised product decisions that are not in alignment with your users. This is part of why I actually hope FB's currency takes off because maybe they can stop worshipping at the altar of click revenue.

Who am I kidding, it's just another revenue line-item on the 10K.

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

#213

Post by cfarm »

techntoke wrote: post #183
cfarm wrote: post #101

When Chrome did this they quickly highlighted how much control they have over what people view. Privacy focused open browsers will gain marketshare because of it.

What did Chrome do exactly? Cause they never said they were disabling ad-blocker extensions. That was the grapevine effect from the Firefox crowd.

I was referring to this, but it looks like there was an update to the article saying that it might not block everything https://www.tomsguide.com/us/chrome-block-ad-blockers,news-3...

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

#214

Post by nitrogen »

josh2600 wrote: post #212
r00fus wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This had been happening for a decade or more based on anecdotal evidence - so much so that I had to double-check then change my intranet app at a previous smaller company (2008). The new thing is Google valuing their profits over the wishes of a large population of their users.

This hits the nail on the head. This is how big companies lose their way and get eaten by smaller companies. We all think Google is invincible because of their technological monopoly, but the problem of having to grow forever due to the way public markets work necessitates product evolution or squeezing blood from the stone. The real monopoly is philosophy, not technology, and it's so, so, so easy to lose the logos/p…

...logos/pathos/eros...

Did you perhaps mean ethos?

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

#215

Post by l30n4da5 »

rndgermandude wrote: post #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 most…

i used opera for a while, and, while i liked it, it had a glaring bug in Windows 10 that jist didnt go away in the year or so i was using it.

that being said ...opera already has their own extensions store.

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

#216

Post by l30n4da5 »

nedp wrote: post #204
techntoke wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, Firefox already supports WebExtensions and it is like common knowledge. Mozilla barely has the experience to run a sync service, and even that is a disaster.

I don't think Firefox Sync is a disaster. In fact, it's the opposite. They managed to handle the service pretty well.

not originally. when sync first came out, and for a while after, it was a dumpster fire.

that being said, it is load better now.

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

#217

Post by qbaqbaqba »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #124
guelo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically Firefox killed their extension API to be compatible with Chrome's extensions. Now they probably don't want to be compatible with the new Chrome API.

> Ironically Firefox killed their extension API to be compatible with Chrome's extensions. This is misleading. They deprecated the old API primarily to be able to do multi-process and get rid of XUL.

> get rid of XUL

XUL is still used by the browser itself.

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

#219

Post by unicornporn »

mattlondon wrote: post #99
unicornporn wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try https://www.startpage.com/ Works as proxy for Google Search. No captchas, very customizable. Could never live with the Bing based crap results of DuckDuckGo.

Oh DDG gas been my primary search engine for ages now. Highly recommend DDG. No CAPTCHAS there - it is just on random other sites that use reCAPTCHA that are a pain now as I believe (I don't know for sure) that Google relies on your Google cookie(s) that they have associated with your account - if you have sandboxed Google then there is no "normal" browsing history to check so you look like a bot. Annoying, but not r…

> I don't think having proxied Google search results will solve the reCAPTCHA menace since you presumably won't get the Google cookie(s)? If Google still cookie you when using startpage then that kinda defeats the point surely?

Let me be clear. I'm not taking about SOCKS proxies. In this context I'm saying that both DDG and StartPage are acting as anonymizing proxies for Bing and Google.

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

#220

Post by michaelmrose »

SquareWheel wrote: post #152
gorhill wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Safari version supports "Acceptable Ads". I counted ~17,000 rules[1] which includes exception rules. Also, keep in mind cosmetic exception filters are not implemented through the declarativeNetRequest API. (Edited for accuracy regarding rule count) * * * [1] https://gitlab.com/eyeo/adblockplus/adblockplussafarimacos/t...

It's been my assumption that with a little bit of scripting, EasyList could be pruned to land within the 30K without too much trouble. As you have more experience in this fields though, do you have any thoughts on how viable this approach would be, and if the 30K limit will be a problem in the end?

Doesn't any finite length list that is only able to be updated when the addon is updated mean ad networks can use a random string with more combinations than the size of list to defeat all ad blocking?
Post reply on HN