[flagged]
[flagged]
Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
101–110 of 962 posts
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#102Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.
Its not happening
I don't know, I switched to Safari and it was painful for like two hours and then I stopped thinking about it. The only thing I somewhat miss is the built-in page translate, but I don't need it often enough to be bothered much.
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
The little I've read bout this says that maintaining MV2 might be something as well. If other chromium based browsers didn't have this issue, that would be great, but likely in time Youtube won't support browsers that don't have MV3. Probably still have some time though.
Switched to Firefox yesterday, I suggest you do the same.
Are they still funded to the tune of a billion a year by Google so that Google can pretend they don't have a monopoly? Are they still intent on redefining as an ad company?
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe them. The restrictions are reasonable and appropriate for nearly everyone. Extensions are untrusted code that should have as little access as possible. If restrictions can be bypassed, that's a security bug that should be fixed because it directly affects users. I also think uBlock Origin is so important and trusted it should not only be an exception to the whole thing but should also be given even more acc…
Would that rip off the how-do-we-fund-the-web bandaid, forcing new solutions? Worry about the interim where some publishers would presumably cease to exist. And who would remain afloat—those with proprietary apps, as Zucky as they are, I’d guess… UBO is absolutely incredibly important. Figure you might know more than me about how journalists and reviewers and the like can still earn a keep in a world with adblockers…
> Would that rip off the how-do-we-fund-the-web bandaid, forcing new solutions?
Absolutely. The web is mostly ad funded. Advertising in turn fuels surveillance capitalism and is the cause of countless dark patterns everywhere. Ads are the root cause of everything that is wrong with the web today. If you reduce advertising return on investiment to zero, it will fix the web. Therefore blocking ads is a moral imperative.
> Worry about the interim where some publishers would presumably cease to exist.
Let them disappear. Anyone making money off of advertising cannot be trusted. They will never make or write anything that could get their ad money cut off.
People used to pay to have their own websites where they published their views and opinions, not the other way around. I want that web back. A web made up of real people who have something real to say, not a web of "creators" of worthless generic attention baiting "content" meant to fill an arbitrary box whose entire purpose is to attract you so that you look at banner ads.
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#105Haven't missed Chrome once since switching to https://brave.com/
Of all the browsers you could be using, giving your data away to sketchy crypto bros should really not be at the top of the list.
It's the top of the list because it works so well. I forget it's a different browser most of the time. I was able to turn off everything extraneous that I was concerned about. Brave is also Open Sourced.
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#106Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.
Its not happening
It definitely is, buy I think the silent majority just don't care all that much. Is that what you're referring to?
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#107I'd gladly pay for YouTube without ads if I trusted that it would remain ad free, but the track record from various companies on this is not good.
Don't let everyone responding gaslight you. YouTube Premium is absolutely stuffed with ads[0] (sorry, 'promoted content' / 'sponsorship'). The only probable explanation I have for this is that Google has successfully boiled the frog and people mentally don't even register these things as ads anymore. And that's not to mention pretty much every single creator stuffing sponsored sections into their videos now. We have…
I think people just decided it doesn't count as ads when it's the creator doing it. And it feels more tolerable since the money is going to the creator that they probably like instead of megacorp Google.
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its not happening
I don't know, I switched to Safari and it was painful for like two hours and then I stopped thinking about it. The only thing I somewhat miss is the built-in page translate, but I don't need it often enough to be bothered much.
I find switching from chrome to safari essentially doing nothing. If you switched to a non-big-company owned browser, it would make sense but Apple has plenty of lock in which is as bad as chrome lock in.
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be shocked if anyone actually believes them. This article starts with the obvious conflict of interest. Of course letting an extension know what websites you visit and what requests are made is an insecure lifestyle. But I still do it because I trust uBO more than I trust the ad companies and their data harvesters.
I believe them. The restrictions are reasonable and appropriate for nearly everyone. Extensions are untrusted code that should have as little access as possible. If restrictions can be bypassed, that's a security bug that should be fixed because it directly affects users. I also think uBlock Origin is so important and trusted it should not only be an exception to the whole thing but should also be given even more acc…
> Extensions are untrusted code that should have as little access as possible.
It's entirely possible to manually vet extension code and extension updates in the same way that Mozilla does as part of their Firefox recommended extensions program.
> Firefox is committed to helping protect you against third-party software that may inadvertently compromise your data – or worse – breach your privacy with malicious intent. Before an extension receives Recommended status, it undergoes rigorous technical review by staff security experts.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/recommended-extensions-...
Other factors taken into consideration:
Does the extension function at an exemplary level?
Does the extension offer an exceptional user experience?
Is the extension relevant to a general, international audience?
Is the extension actively developed?
Re: Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, in his defense it would have been patched immediately after the first adblocker used it, and he would have gotten nothing at all out of it. Oh wait he got nothing at all anyway ;)
Would be quite different if they patched it and broke important extensions, possibly facing serieous outcry and bad publicity.
That's what they already did.