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

Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 170 posts

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#151

Post by akomtu »

charcircuit wrote: post #111
akomtu wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that was the case, mv3 would let extensions block arbitrary requests on a subdomain, e.g. "uBO wants to block requests on *.com, Yes/No".

Trying to keep webRequestBlocking around would mean that the performance benefits of declareNetRequest wouldn't propogate an well as it could. The worst offendors of being slow to block requests are likely to be the same extentions who wouldn't migrate to declareNetRequest.

There are no performance benefits of declareNetRequest. One regex is faster than matching against tens of thousands of urls.

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#152

Post by [deleted] »

tjpnz wrote: post #138
tyingq wrote: post #16

Just fine tuning how slowly to boil the frogs. At some point, they will pull the trigger. My hypothesis is that the various entities that want to work around ad-blockers hold back for now, because they don't want to push people from the more basic blockers to the more advanced ones. Once this is in place, pretty much all adblockers of note are dns based, or semi-static list based...."basic". I wonder if there's a ren…

I don't understand this mentality. What do ad-tech companies like Google gain from showing an ad to an unwilling participant? Click through rates are going to crater and people are just going to stop using Chrome.

[deleted]

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#153

Post by ahartmetz »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #76
xchkr1337 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish Mozilla focused more on Linux support. I tried switching to Firefox multiple times, and in day-to-day use I always keep running into unfixable problems like bad font rendering, slow webgl performance, ui glitches etc. Problems like this never happen when I'm using Firefox on Windows, and honestly the state of Firefox on Linux is kind of surprising since it's the most commonly recommended and preinstalled brows…

I can’t report any of those issues, my biggest gripe is Ubuntu forcing a snap package on to me

You need Firefox from the Mozilla PPA.

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#154

Post by tyingq »

tjpnz wrote: post #138
tyingq wrote: post #16

Just fine tuning how slowly to boil the frogs. At some point, they will pull the trigger. My hypothesis is that the various entities that want to work around ad-blockers hold back for now, because they don't want to push people from the more basic blockers to the more advanced ones. Once this is in place, pretty much all adblockers of note are dns based, or semi-static list based...."basic". I wonder if there's a ren…

I don't understand this mentality. What do ad-tech companies like Google gain from showing an ad to an unwilling participant? Click through rates are going to crater and people are just going to stop using Chrome.

I thought similarly about AMP. They continued the forced march, and well...

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#155

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

ahartmetz wrote: post #153
hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t report any of those issues, my biggest gripe is Ubuntu forcing a snap package on to me

You need Firefox from the Mozilla PPA.

Yes I know, but requiring me to add a PPA purely because canonical want to push snap is toxically bad faith

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#156

Post by kmlx »

kivle wrote: post #52
pkulak wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wait? Move to Firefox now.

Using 2-3x as much battery as all other browsers on my Macbook is the dealbreaker for me.. I want to use the same browser on all systems when I move..

if you care about battery life then safari is the way to go.

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#157

Post by thiht »

vbernat wrote: post #137
adithyassekhar wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone from Mozilla is reading, I want to switch to Firefox. But I used to have a Firefox account with 2fa and lost my backup keys. The best part they won't even let me delete that account and start new even if I sent a mail from that same email account. I don't want to create another Gmail account just for Firefox.

Add a dot somewhere in the user part of the address. This looks like a new address but it is not.

Another trick is to use @googlemail.com instead of @gmail.com

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#158

Post by Kye »

ikiris wrote: post #93
Kye wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember getting into it with a Google person in a forum once. They kept insisting they couldn't do real, portable files in Google Drive for Docs because that would break collaboration. They didn't seem able to understand I didn't want collaboration. I wanted to be able to open my word processor/spreadsheet/etc files in other tools without needing to connect to the internet (predates offline mode). I wanted to be a…

Collaboration is the killer feature of the docs ecosystem. You will never convince them to break it for X reason.

I don't want them to break it. I understand why the two needs are incompatible. What I want is a way to opt out at a file or even account level so I can access my stuff in Drive. This is what they could not understand. It wasn't "this isn't possible," it was "why would someone want that?"

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#159

Post by lapcat »

summerlight wrote: post #47
brucethemoose2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to be a pattern among Google employees, as least as I'm seeing from the outside. They have their own company reality bubble, and clashes or inconsistencies with the outside world are met with disbelief.

For this specific case of MV3, I wonder how many of those developers are actually writing and maintaining extensions. Yeah, I know one suspected motivation of this change is disabling ad blockers but IMO even if we ignore this aspect this migration is planned badly everywhere. If they really wanted to focus on just kicking ass of ad blockers, it would be done much quicker without facing this level of backlashes. Not…

> For this specific case of MV3, I wonder how many of those developers are actually writing and maintaining extensions.

This is a huge problem, also for the Safari extensions team. Google doesn't ship many of its own extensions, and Apple ships none. Moreover, there's no evidence that either of these companies actually talk to extensions developers—i.e, have actual conversations with them—before shipping extension APIs.

Did Google talk with the developers of uBlock Origin or Tampermonkey before designing MV3? Not doing so is negligence.

Re: Pausing Manifest V2 phase-out changes

#160

Post by hyperman1 »

bornfreddy wrote: post #30
whstl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is hubris. Google thinks it can get away with anything, since they're the market leader. The reality is that a certain number of people will migrate to Firefox over AdBlockers not working well anymore, and will give FF a second life. And those are the people who helped get Chrome off the ground by installing on the computers of relatives and recommending to friends.

This, 1000 times. There is only one thing a monopoly holder is afraid of - losing the monopoly.

Im not sure Google understands they have and profit from a monopoly.

When the EU sued Microsoft, the reaction inside and outside differed wildly. Outside, there was a 'finally' feeling. Inside, Microsoftees went from denial straight to shock. They just could not understand they had become the bad guys.

They still lived in the 80s, where Microsoft was hailed as the saviour from the IBM monopoly. They might admit some individual trouble spots, but did not see these as connected to a bigger problem or core company culture. Microsoft believed their detractors were a small deluded noisy minority, but surely not the common opinion.

Google is in for a rude awakening.

Post reply on HN