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

231–240 of 256 posts

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

#231

Post by ionised »

TylerE wrote: post #154
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

I think that's rather revisionist. At a point in time Chrome was way better than not just IE, but way better than Firefox. The performance was leaps and bounds ahead.

I think this is the revisionism to be honest.

Chrome became as widespread as it did because it was bundled like crapware with installers for various pieces of software and they plastered scare-mongering banners all over their service telling people they had to use Chrome to get the correct experience, or deliberately gimping their own services on other browsers.

Chrome may have been the better browser at release, but simply being better did not get it to where it is.

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

#232

Post by gremlinsinc »

stcredzero wrote: post #170
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…

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. How about "app store as a service?"

They should team up for the good of all, and create a communally owned fork of Chromium that they all contribute to, and a marketplace. That way the ensure their ecosystem can thrive outside of Google's kingdom.

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

#233

Post by techntoke »

qtplatypus wrote: post #222
techntoke wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google never said they were blocking ad-blockers. It was the hyperbole Firefox crowd who used some post by Raymond Hill from the creator of uBlock Origin as a reason to start another "Switch to Firefox" campaign. However, Hill admitted that adblockers aren't going away and it is just a proposed change in the WebRequest API to make things more akin to Safari to help adblockers operate in a standard in speedy way. Mozi…

Can you link to the site where he says this?

https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/chrome-may-get-faster-ad-block...

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

#235

Post by hungryfoolish »

Isinlor wrote: post #79
user17843 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe think about it in a different way. Right now, there is a kill-switch within googles primary product that could essentially destroy their business model. This is not about google wanting to harm the current power users. It is probably the idea that someone could come along and destroy their business. If such an extensions goes mainstream that could seriously harm them. They may also want to get rid of paying Adb…

ABP is compatible with the new API and will not be affected. See: https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/declarativeNetReques... This is API that ABP can use. But with the new API the rules list will be limited to 30 000 rules vs. for example 42 000 EasyList is using, and an update to the rules will require a full update of the plugin. See also comments from gorhill: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/iss…

>ABP is compatible with the new API and will not be affected.

Thats just false. Every adblocker using webrequest will be affected, including ABP.

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

#236

Post by crankylinuxuser »

ralphstodomingo wrote: post #4
SanchoPanda wrote: post #2

I wonder if that is sustainable as features are built on top of the new system and their codebase diverges further and further from chrome as a result.

I won't worry about that. I'm guessing this effectively creates a fork of Chromium that does not have the anti-ad blocker changes in question, which Opera/Brave/Edge will use instead of the main one. On that note, are people switching over to Firefox already?

I'm not switching to Firefox.

I never left. Firefox, even for its warts, wasn't run by a adtech company. I knew this would happen sooner or later. And now, the thumbscrews tighten.

Now yes, Moz://a has done some dumb stuff.. But so does many others. Still its the best we have.

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

#237

Post by aembleton »

Chirael wrote: post #139
agumonkey wrote: post #123

I, for the first time ever, uninstalled chrome/chromium from my computers. It pains me because I liked it overall, and firefox isn't happy with my 2009 laptops. Maybe chrome devs mistake will be the air gap that creates a new leader from another group.

I got a new computer recently (old one died), and because of this change I will not install Chrome on the new computer. I’m planning to use Edge for anything Google-specific like Google Docs or Sheets, and Firefox for everything else. Unfortunately, my wife has a Chromebook and it’s hard to convince her that her very cheap, almost-disposable laptop should be replaced with something more expensive just to avoid Chrome…

Can't she install Firefox from the Play store?

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

#238

Post by aembleton »

chmod775 wrote: post #23
close04 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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 sign up at https://www.nextdns.io/ and then you can block ads at the DNS level. Simple to do, and updated, and without the overhead of running a local VPN.

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

#239

Post by aembleton »

chmod775 wrote: post #47
Madeindjs wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

See my comment above, you can use https://www.nextdns.io/

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

#240

Post by lmm »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #202
jasode wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Not because it was a superior product, not because of technology but because everyone was anti IE. >>>I think that's rather revisionist. I agree with the sibling comments that remembered the past differently: Back in 2008, Chrome was actually the superior product -- for both users and developers. - Chrome had a better partitioned process for each tab. IE and Firefox 3.x didn't so they often crashed on buggy web page…

Chrome had a built in PDF viewer which was convenient. In IE, clicking on a pdf link triggered a disruptive "Save file as" prompt or if one had Adobe installed, it would launch Adobe Reader which was a jarring UI experience& Good points for the most part, but not that one. A shitty JavaScript .PDF viewer is a much more "jarring UI experience" than launching an external viewer that I intentionally installed for just t…

What Chrome actually did was bundle a well-regarded viewing plugin on windows. The "shitty JavaScript .PDF viewer" was a Firefox innovation.
Post reply on HN