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

Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

webiterate.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 648 posts

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#431

Post by TylerE »

Pxtl wrote: post #398
cute_boi wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk if apple can validate each and every apps before publishing to appstore, why can't google and facebook validate each and every ads?

Newspapers and magazines didn't sell ad space to obvious crooks back in the day. Scammers didn't have tv ads. Obviously there was somebody watching them. The trashy scams were reserved for the real scummy publishers: comic books.

Scammers had entire TV networks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Broadcasting_Network

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#432

Post by TylerE »

zhivota wrote: post #277
Eueudhsbsj32 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On goes Firefox, uBlock Origin, and a couple other extensions. They don't care what browser they use. I did the same with my mom, but then her broker and doctor's websites started complaining that they will only run on a supported browser, i.e., Chrome. I've gotten her to still use Firefox for most other things, but it's not easy.

You can try Brave, it's Chromium under the hood so it's usually accepted and has built in ad blocking, and a one click way to turn it off for a specific site if you have an issue.

[flagged]

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#433

Post by taviso »

zamadatix wrote: post #430
taviso wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> content can load without the blocker being ready to filter This isn't an MV3 issue, it's a Chromium design decision that extensions cannot block browser initialization. It was also true with MV2. In fact, MV3 has improved the situation because DNR rules are enforced immediately. You could certainly argue that Chrome should allow extensions to block browser initialization, or that it should be user configurable - bu…

Any MV3 issue could probably be summed up as "MV3 isn't so bad, just the implementation in Chrome" where Chrome defines MV3 (as it's not a W3C standard) and ships it as such. That said, > Chromium design decision that extensions cannot block browser initialization It's not "browser initialization" that was blocked, it was blocking network requests for pages until they were processed by all components in the chain. No…

> and then the request had to wait until it was given to and processed by the blocker.

Despite the name, the requests were not blocked until the extension had initialized. The browser could make network requests before that happened with MV2. With MV3, static rulesets and persistent DNR rules are enforced immediately.

> With MV2 you'd use blocking webRequest and chrome.webRequest.onBeforeSendHenders

Of course an extensions could do this, I said uBO lite. DNR made exposing this powerful functionality fast and easy. My point is that MV3 uBO lite has useful features that MV2 uBO does not.

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#434

Post by hedora »

doginasuit wrote: post #343
Night_Thastus wrote: post #25

I know Firefox's share of browser share has dwindled to almost nothing. I know sooner or later, well within my lifetime, it will be gone. But I will keep using it until they pry it from my hands. And if they do, I'll use forks until those break down too. I can't stand Google, or what Chrome has become. No single company should have such unilateral control over the internet and its information.

> I know Firefox's share of browser share has dwindled to almost nothing. I know sooner or later, well within my lifetime, it will be gone. Market share appears to be hovering around 4%, which sounds small but that is still a massive amount of people, over 200 million users. It is even more impressive considering it doesn't have an OS with a large market share feeding it users, people overwhelmingly just use what is…

I use firefox and sometimes safari. I had to install chrome recently, and I don’t understand how people stand it. It’s a half-assed attempt to reimplement windows 95 era preload spam. (Or non-decrapified win11).

I don’t understand how it has any market share. It’s like finding out that 80% of people voluntarily install browser toolbars that force penis pill ads down your throat, and then there are a bunch of HN fanboys saying that all other alternatives are worse.

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#435

Post by pibaker »

none2585 wrote: post #390
pibaker wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There isn't. Not with this attitude.

I hate these comments. What meaningful thing is this person supposed to do? In the US, the government is _owned_ by corporations. To pretend otherwise is naive.

If I am the evil corporations owning the state I would love to make all citizens pathetic cynics who think they have no capability for change and therefore bears no responsibility.

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#436

Post by coryrc »

arcanemachiner wrote: post #386
tdeck wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't care about this. Try searching for a locksmith in your area on Google and the top results are all scans.

How would this scam work? Why would someone pose as a locksmith specifically?

Instead of getting a local locksmith, it's a "lead gen" service which charges the locksmith $100 or something to get your info. They're placed on the map, but aren't actually there.

The only thing that should come up is actual local locksmiths.

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#438

Post by hedora »

wbl wrote: post #171
redox99 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox has 1.4 billion in reserves and no debt. If they stop paying tens of millions to their management, they could easily afford paying devs in perpetuity just from investing that money.

I don't think you get the compensation for devs capable of working on this stuff.

1.4b; assume 5% returns. That’s $70M per year for devs.

At $1M per year (equivalent to a good startup exit, but zero risk), that’s 70 engineers; probably senior to principal phd’s with 10 yr+ experience.

If that’s not enough to maintain a web browser, then pay them to simplify the damn thing.

Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO

#439

Post by stogot »

hedora wrote: post #434
doginasuit wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know Firefox's share of browser share has dwindled to almost nothing. I know sooner or later, well within my lifetime, it will be gone. Market share appears to be hovering around 4%, which sounds small but that is still a massive amount of people, over 200 million users. It is even more impressive considering it doesn't have an OS with a large market share feeding it users, people overwhelmingly just use what is…

I use firefox and sometimes safari. I had to install chrome recently, and I don’t understand how people stand it. It’s a half-assed attempt to reimplement windows 95 era preload spam. (Or non-decrapified win11). I don’t understand how it has any market share. It’s like finding out that 80% of people voluntarily install browser toolbars that force penis pill ads down your throat, and then there are a bunch of HN fanbo…

My hope is the chrome fanboys get forced to experience the full visceral web and revolt.

Will Google employees who used UBO now vomit over their own corp decisions and reverse?

Post reply on HN