A uBlock Origin update was rejected from the Chrome Web Store

Post by ravenstine » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 3:52 PM UTC

alexfromapex wrote: post #129

Someone needs to create a rival search engine to Google. I have tried switching but Bing and DuckDuckGo aren't anywhere near as good.

Post by tasty_freeze » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 3:53 PM UTC

opencl wrote: post #172

Ayesh wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could be wrong, but AFAIK, webrender is the default on latest versions.

It is enabled by default for a small subset of system configurations (Windows desktop machines with AMD or NVIDIA GPU).

Post by Santosh83 » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 3:53 PM UTC

cookie_monsta wrote: post #210

Santosh83 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They cooperate for now, but the balance of power and momentum is heavily in favour of Google as it stands. This will only matter when one of the others wants to hold out on some critical feature and find that they effectively can't if they don't want to see their already minor market share plummet. Apple though do have some clout since they own the entire vertical...

So we have gone from Google powering the living standard to the prediction that they will be able to dominate it at some hypothetical point in the future. Well, maybe. Who's to say? But if we're theorising, I'd say that Google probably learnt a lot from IE's demise and most likely sees the advantage of making sure that the web dev community at least does not actively hate them.

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 3:54 PM UTC

alexandercrohde wrote: post #130

koolba wrote: post #23

>> Your item did not comply with the following section of our policy: An extension should have a single purpose that is clear to users. Any speculation on what the supposed multiple purposes would be? From past experience, is that type of thing something that is automatically flagged / determined programmatically or does a human reviewer of an extension make the call?

I mean you would think their process would be smart enough to say "Hey, we just rejected upload for product X that is THE MOST POPULAR PLUGIN. We haven't rejected any of the prior versions. Maybe let's get a human review. Certainly google employees and the chrome team will be aware of this within an hour if they aren't already. You can bet it's intentional if we don't see a reversal in the next 3 days."

Post by simias » Sat, Oct 12, 2019, 3:55 PM UTC

rvnx wrote: post #48

2ion wrote: post #13

No surprise; after the manifest v3 discussion, this development was to be expected and only a matter of time.

One of the main "advantages" (for Google) of manifest v3, is that there is, not only a blacklist, but also a whitelist of domains bundled with Google Chrome. So the logic is to restrict adblockers, to use the internal Chrome adblock so Google can decide what ads are acceptable or not. An independent study shows that YouTube ads and Search Ads are the ones that the users enjoy the most and wouldn't want to block ;)