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

A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 614 posts

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#71

Post by amenod »

starbugs wrote: post #17
rahuldottech wrote: post #5

Is anyone really surprised? Google makes all its revenue from ads. A couple months ago there was an incident where if I recall correctly, someone published a browser on the play store which allowed users to install desktop browser extensions, one of which was an adblocker for YouTube, and it was removed with vague reasons? Google has been taking steps for a long time to make it harder for adblockers to work on Chrome…

Not surprised, but a bit baffled why they allowed for uBO for such a long time in the first place? It looks as if they misused the community's products and trust to build their monopoly and then kick us out once it's gotten hard enough to compete. Perhaps this is a good thing in the long run, because now people will finally have to switch and maybe contribute to improving Firefox. I am hopeful, but also I must say in…

> I am hopeful, but also I must say in my opinion Firefox is nowhere near Chrome when comparing performance, developer tooling and quality.

I have the opposite experience. I use FF on all my computers and mobile, and when I sit behind some other dev's Chrome the tools are simply atrocious. Maybe it's not the quality that is different, but the way we use the tools? I might have "aligned" myself with FF, as you (and many others) have with Chrome.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#72

Post by bureaucrat »

ignoramous wrote: post #49

If you have to use Chromium, at this point it is clear that Brave is a better Chromium than Chrome [0][1] despite its BAT shenanigans. The UX is super nice, and adblocking just works without having to install any extensions. Hopefully Brave doesn't buy into the whole PrivacySandbox thing Google proposed [2]. For everything else, Firefox should be the default [3][4]. It'd be great if Firefox bundles a content blocker…

I’d rather trust Google than Brave.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#73

Post by Chris_Chambers »

tyingq wrote: post #50

There should be a threshold of "number of active extension users" where Google has a human provide an actual explanation when rejecting an update.

There should be a threshold of "number of active users" where any online platform or business other than online retailers becomes forcibly nationalized and restructured as a nonprofit instrument of the first amendment, and any employee caught attempting to implement any filters or bans after that point is hanged for treason.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#74

Post by cookie_monsta »

zaarn wrote: post #9
scarface74 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Windows there is Firefox, and IE Edge. For the Mac their are both of those plus Safari. Not to mention Chromium based browsers.

Doesn't mean that Chrome isn't a monopoly, with their current marketshare, if Chrome introduces a new feature or changes how some feature works, all competitors have no choice but to implement that change or websites stop working.

That's not really how it worked pre-2010 when IE had the monopoly.

And for all of Chrome (and Google's) faults, it does seem to be reasonably standards- compliant and even open to experimentation. If they want to spend some of their piles of cash developing new features that other browsers can then adopt and then standardise, I don't see the problem.

If developers choose to use Chrome-only features and their pages break on other browsers, that's on them

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#76

Post by scarface74 »

gtirloni wrote: post #37
scarface74 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Windows there is Firefox, and IE Edge. For the Mac their are both of those plus Safari. Not to mention Chromium based browsers.

You need to think in terms of a de facto monopoly in this case: https://definitions.uslegal.com/d/de-facto-monopoly/ https://business-law.freeadvice.com/business-law/trade_regul... I don't know if the 69% number from StatCounter would qualify as a de facto monopoly, but it's close to the 75% number quoted in the previous article: https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...

Well, “de facto” monopoly doesn’t mean anything in the eyes of the law. That’s what de jure means Despite what HN posters believe, the definition of a monopoly isn’t “a company that is big and does things I don’t like”.

Also according to your own citation.

Under the Sherman Act monopoly power is considered the ability of a business to control a price within its relevant product market or its geographic market or to exclude a competitor from doing business within its relevant product market or geographic market.

Where in that act does it say anything about “banning an ad blocker”? It specifically mentions “price”. Are we going to say that the government can tell businesses what is allowed in its own store?

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#77

Post by amenod »

cameronbrown wrote: post #21
panpanna wrote: post #4

HN needs a better search function :) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21232438 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21231493 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21233041

Or not? Let's not bloat the website. Angolia HN works fine.

Or maybe HN needs an autosuggest function, something similar to what SO has? "These news were posted recently and match yours pretty closely, are you sure you want to post another one?"

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#78

Post by jacquesm »

Santosh83 wrote: post #61
gtirloni wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a pretty good idea for Google and, judging by the adoption, it serves users very well too. I think it's up to other browsers to offer better solutions.

It doesn't serve users in any sense that Firefox or another alternative can't. It's just been pushed so well by Google on all its devices and properties that users have been conditioned to think browser == Chrome.

I can't count the number of times that Google disingenuously suggested my internet experience would be better if I only switched to Chrome. A normal user confronted with an entity the size of Google with associated authority profile would have long ago switched.

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#79

Post by SimeVidas »

dustingetz wrote: post #38
fishtacos wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Odd - my experience is the opposite. FF is noticeably slower than Chrome, and my Chrome installation is loaded with extensions, unlike Firefox. Phoronix's tests seem to back my experience as well. From 4 days ago: "As for the Firefox vs. Chrome performance, Google's web browser continues generally delivering better performance." https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=firefox6...

Firefox scroll lags like 500ms behind my input, on my mbp. How does anyone live like that?

My setup:

1. Firefox Nightly

2. WebRender enabled

3. Tracking Protection set to Strict + DuckDuckGo extension

Re: A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

#80

Post by morsch »

Causality1 wrote: post #46
radicalbyte wrote: post #6

It's time to switch to Firefox as my main web browser. It's faster and generally more efficient than Chrome plus it has the most important extensions. The most surprising thing is that the Android version of Firefox is excellent. So good that I switched from Chrome a few months ago when this expected news first dropped. No ads on mobile is awesome.

Only downside to Firefox mobile is its crummy tab management. Especially when browsing in landscape mode it takes an incredibly long swipe to dismiss a tab. I don't think I go a week without yelling "oh my God, go away!" at my phone after failing to close a tab after multiple tries.

I use an add-on that adds a close button to the address bar: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/addon/tab-close-web...
Post reply on HN