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

Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 448 posts

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#231

Post by khrbrt »

wffurr wrote: post #215

What a needlessly hostile title that editorializes and doesn't match the linked article. @dang can you change it to match the site? I think this submission violates the site guidelines on titles. The original title is "Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary" and doesn't include the ad blocker flame bait. "Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editori…

The bit about adblockers provides context on why this article is worth my attention. I'm not an extension developer, so "Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary" means nothing to me.

But this:

>The most controversial aspect of the extension manifest v3 is the upcoming changes to the webRequest API. In v3, Google has changed the API so that extensions can only monitor browser connections, but not modify any of the content before it's displayed.

>Instead Google wants developers to use the declarativeNetRequest API, which has the browser, not the extension, strip content or resources from a visited web sites. This API, though, has a limit of 30,000 rules that can be created.

>Unfortunately, this change will break popular ad blockers such as uBlock Origin, which rely on the original functionality of the webRequest API and need more rules than are available in the declarativeNetRequest API.

Is very worrying. So thanks to the submitter.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#232

Post by propogandist »

kmlx wrote: post #61

hasn't Apple done the same with Safari? https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.zdnet.com/google-amp/arti... curiously i haven't noticed any changes on my day to day browsing habits.

Safari's marketshare is insignificant.

You've also included an /amp/ link, which is another part of the problem of becoming too dependent on Google.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#233

Post by gjm11 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #174
claudeganon wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is already deeply in bed with the Democratic Party and has been buying up some just lovely Republicans at a good clip: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/google-miles-ta... While I tend to agree with you about them keeping Firefox alive, my guess is that they’re becoming less concerned with a legitimate antitrust complaint and that this “alive” will end up being “just barely.”

Betting protection from antitrust issues on getting cozy with a political party is a risky strategy; political landscape shifts on quite regular basis. It's safer to keep a competitor alive so that if and when the power goes to people who don't like you, it won't be easy for them to go after you.

That would be why they're (allegedly -- I haven't checked) buying up those lovely Republicans.

I think it's likely to be a while before any political party other than the Democrats and the Republicans holds a lot of power in the US.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#234

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

darkwater wrote: post #63
hechang1997 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many many people use adblockers now. The amount of users they will alienate would be very high.

Nope, mostly tech-savvy people use adblockers, it's astonishing how many people still see ads on a daily basis.

I operate a website visited primarily by both unsophisticated users and non-expert but savvy users (the former group being the demographic that exchange emoji-laden meme images on Facebook, and the latter group as the type of people comfortable getting around a phpBB board in the mid-2000s). I've seen a steady decline in AdSense/AdWords ad-revenue from visitors based on ad-impressions despite increasing visitor counts from those two main demographics - the evidence suggests they're using some form of ad-blocker.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#235

Post by rusk »

mcv wrote: post #175
rusk wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

has anyone else noticed a marked decline in the quality of Google search results over the last 12 months? I swear, around about 2011 I thought Google was going to become self aware but it's declined from that high-point to a point where duckduckgo has become a viable alternative for more than just reasons of privacy. Which is a great thing! Turns out "Don't be Evil" was more than just a feel-good marketing slogan. It…

I've noticed that for far longer than 12 months. Google search results are frequently crap. DuckDuckGo is often better. But sometimes I dream about building my own search engine. It would avoid the big ad-driven sites as much as possible, and give preferential treatment to obscure blog posts about topics nobody else has written about. I want a search result to show the many different ways it could be interpreted, rat…

That’s Google c. 2011

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#236

Post by _jal »

saagarjha wrote: post #183
appleflaxen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

his actions show he is disingenuous. you don't need to make any value judgements because his actions are inconsistent with his rhetoric.

I have found that picking at people for a decision that you don’t agree with is rarely useful; we already have people going through GitHub to find instances of other “disingenuous” behavior. Like the decision or not, the change is the product of an entire team at Google, and it’s not productive to harass the one person mentioned here because they’re an easy target.

> it’s not productive to harass

True. They won't change their mind. The only signal they will listen to is to stop using Chrome.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#237

Post by chatmasta »

fastball wrote: post #213
mcv wrote: post #170

I'm in the process of switching as much as possible to Firefox. I now use Firefox Mobile on my smartphone, and my new laptop doesn't even get Chrome. And in many ways, it's been a breath of fresh air. Firefox gives my much more control over my privacy, and even recommends some extensions to improve it further. A couple of websites are sadly broken on my Firefox setup, but I can live without them. I want to get back t…

Why not something like Brave which has the performance of Chromium (still better than Firefox imo) because it's a fork but probably won't make similar business decisions to Google?

By the same logic you could use Microsoft Edge, which is now chromium based and effectively a chrome shell.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#238

Post by fauigerzigerk »

malvosenior wrote: post #216
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know Mr Vincent or anyone else at Google, but it seems unrealistic to assume that no one at Google could possibly believe that advertising is helping not hurting the open Web. Stock options and bosses with different incentives are available at other employers as well.

I don’t think anyone could be naive enough to believe ads help the open web. > Stock options and bosses with different incentives are available at other employers as well. Most other employers don’t have a near monopoly on the web browser market.

>I don’t think anyone could be naive enough to believe ads help the open web

I don't think assuming bad faith with absolute certainty is a productive form of debate.

[Edit]: As a matter of fact, I don't believe that advertising is entirely replaceable as a funding mechanism for the open web at this point in time. That doesn't mean we have to accept all its excesses without resistance.

>Most other employers don’t have a near monopoly on the web browser market.

A near monopoly is not a prerequisite for an employee to make a lot of money somewhere else, especially not for someone in a PR role like "advocate".

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#239

Post by Spare_account »

neuronic wrote: post #204
apexalpha wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowaways I put a pihole in every home of my family members. Together with unchecky (windows) my calls dropped by 95% or so.

What lists are you using, which avoiding? My use of pihole constantly disrupted basic services such as Sonos. I can certainly find the URL culprits and resolve it, but I got tired of constantly doing so...

I have Sonos kit and a pi-hole. I use the default lists plus the ticked lists from this site: https://firebog.net/

I have no issues with my Sonos equipment - I use a local MP3 library, a Spotify subscription and TuneIn Radio all without any issues.

What problems did you have?

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#240

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

eyegor wrote: post #185
cletus wrote: post #157

Did anyone actually read the submission? The title is clickbait that doesn't reflect the content. The change here moves modifying content of the webRequest to the browser from the extension. This is fundamentally more secure. Allowing third-party extensions to inspect and _modify_ arbitrary HTTP requests is nothing short of dangerous. The new declarative API (from the article) limits such extensions to 30,000 rules.…

This isn't just the rule limit, and the most powerful part of extensions imo is to be able to block/modify elements at the dom level. Both for ad blocking and for customizations (reflow pages, modify css, etc). If you don't feel comfortable giving access to blockers, it's not that hard to roll your own. Just read the format of easylist. > extensions can only monitor browser connections, but not modify any of the cont…

And if requests are blocked then content publishers can very easily detect ad-blockers and intentionally degrade the user-experience or add nag screens that aren't part of the usual ad network code. If it's an SPA then it'd be almost impossible to untangle easily when the site's developers can add their "is-adblock-detected?" checks anywhere in their SPA codebase and mess with the UX at-will.
Post reply on HN