Actual title is
"Google Has Removed Manifest V2 Extensions From the Chrome Web Store, Including uBlock Origin"
Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
591–600 of 648 posts
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#592Earlier quoted context omitted.
This type of populist message seems like such an easy path to popularity for an aspiring politician. You don't have to be a leftist like Bernie Sanders to be a trust buster. Just acknowledge that almost every large corporation has seemingly made it their mission to make life worse for the citizenry in the name of profit and vow to fight it.
Anyone running with that type of message will be squashed by said "every large corporation". They will finance their opponent(s). They will run deep fakes against them. Until "every large corporation" is prevented from spending unlimited money, things will not change. What would limiting corporations from contributing more than the total of max donation per employee? I've never seen numbers from that, but I've heard…
So next time around they point to every instance of this, post it all somewhere and link to it everywhere, and make a big point about how they are actually scaring them enough that maybe they can make a difference this time.
I do agree that we need to limit spending, but I don't know how to get there without a candidate like this getting traction. Sort of a chicken and egg thing.
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#593Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are levels to this though. You wouldn't hold a landlord accountable if it was a surprise that a crime took place, but if they were aware that some of their tenants were committing crimes and just "choosing not to ask about it," they could reasonably be called "accountable." Telcos are regularly asked to give up information regarding crimes committed by their customers, see the Patriot Act for details - in some…
You moved the goalposts to make your arguments. You say landlords should only have accountability for the crimes of their tenants if they chose to do nothing to prevent their property from being used for crime. Google doesn't just ignore bad advertisers, they prevent the vast majority of malicious ads and report the worst offenders to law enforcement. Google is already doing far more than what you say immunizes landl…
I will concede that I missed the "every" in the GP comment - and you're right, that by itself is probably an unreasonable standard. I do think there is more that Google could do to address what most of us would call "known" bad actors, in the same way that telcos could do more to drop bogus spoofers. It's great that Google is doing something, but it's also knowingly leaving channels open that are for illegitimate operators.
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#594Earlier 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.
A user-agent spoofer like Chrome Mask is helpful here: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/chrome-mask/ It's off by default and has to be turned on per site, but will automatically stay on for subsequent visits. Test the site with it to be sure it works for your mom. Most sites that insist on enforcing Chrome-only user-agents run just fine on Firefox. I've encountered a few that run even better on Firefox…
"Most sites that insist on enforcing Chrome-only user-agents run just fine on Firefox."
I have never encountered a site that requires a Chrome user-agent string
Some sites require a string that either (a) is in a list of acceptable strings (that includes non-Chrome strings) or (b) follows a certain format
FWIW, most websites submitted to HN, including many high traffic sites, do not require a user-agent header at all
What are some examples of these alleged "Chrome-only" sites
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#595Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Democrats already tried out the idea that Trumpism would blow over and everything would go back to "normal" with Biden's 2020 campaign, but it didn't really turn out that way. Right-wing reactionary politics has been overrepresented in the US since its founding due to state based representation, and I expect that this will continue to be the case for as long as the US exists in its current form.
It would help if they actually ran a candidate that leaned more moderate than extreme. They seem to choose candidates specifically to rile up the Republican base. That makes sense if this is actually a football rivalry or something but if they want to get elected they need to appeal to the middle, which doesn't seem (at least from my perspective) to happen very often.
Biden and Harris were both centrist choices. Harris specifically campaigned with never-Trump Republicans by her side. It didn't matter. Republican campaign ads and their captive media ecosystem portrayed them as radical leftists.
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#596Ad blocking has become a safety issue. My parents are at an age where they fall for things. If a malicious ad pops up and offers to install McAfee, some other form of crapware, or outright scamware, they'll click that ad and install the thing. Then I'll get called over when the computer starts acting screwy. If Google, MS, etc. had ever gotten together and developed a way to filter malicious ads out of their own ad s…
It feels weird that everyone is talking like Google has banned adblocking in Chrome, when there's dozens of adblockers still in the extension store, including an updated version of uBO that works 90% the same . Ad-blocking is a safety issue, but luckily you can still block them just fine.[1] The only thing this heavily neuters is tracking blocking, but no one admits that because they know, deep down, that ~0% of the…
Don't try to deflect blame from the irredeemably evil fucks over at the Chrome team, who are sitting in their dark lair rubbing their hands together, scheming about how they can fuck the user over today. They are always to blame.
gorhill made the reasonable move of not updating in-place because the new version is strictly inferior and you don't just make a massive downgrade like that without the opportunity to explain it to people.
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#597I 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.
As someone with both Chrome and Firefox installed why should I click the Firefox button? I mean it's mostly the same but gives me out of memory errors. Last time I tried it a thing saying "Refresh Firefox" popped up which I clicked and it wiped the extensions which I got back following some online help but lost completely I think the crypto keys in metamask - like https://www.reddit.com/r/Metamask/comments/14rcg6k/fi…
I've never seen Firefox use more memory than Chrome on modern versions. They're pretty on par.
It's far more likely that one of the many addons/extensions you had was the cause.
As for 'Refresh Firefox', it does exactly what it says it does - wipe a lot of your configuration to bring it closer to stock. It's intended as a way to show people new defaults and help clear out old, bloated configs. It shouldn't be used unless you know what you're doing.
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#598Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nevertheless, MV3's ability to offer limited filtering on startup does not seem like such a blessing when the other option was to just support full filtering on startup Sure, but as I said, it's a design decision, and nothing to do with MV3. I'm not trying to litigate it one way or the other. I do think DNR is a good solution, and that request callbacks were a bad idea. That's my opinion - and the counterargument i…
Again, we really need to separate "MV3 - the theoretical idea" and "MV3 - the actual implementation which ships with Chrome". It's two confusingly different worlds. Nobody should be swaying you to prefer DNR over webRequest (or vice versa) when other browsers show both can be available options for the extensions you use as makes sense for what they try to do/what type you'd like to install. Continuing to support MV2…
> the biggest failure of MV3 is not in lacking anything new whatsoever, it's in forcing the removal of a lot of API options which were useful in the name of ulterior motives.
What was the ulterior motive? If it was to break ad blocking, it seems like they did a really terrible job, as MV3 ad blockers work great. That's not me saying that, here is a paper from researchers at Goethe University Frankfurt who tested it:
> Moreover, cross-browser experiments yield comparable outcomes, and visual inspection confirms that MV3 ad blockers work effectively without significant ad flickering or loss of functionality
From: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.01000
> Funnily enough, this morning I ran across another feature I didn't realize was missing in MV3
I think you could accomplish this by redirecting instead of blocking, then increment a counter in a webRequest callback. There would obviously be a performance cost, as blocking is so cheap and callbacks are expensive...
Regardless, I think it's jarring hearing you call custom DNR rules "painting the house red", a legitimately powerful feature... and then point to a missing counter in the UI as evidence of lacking features!
Anyway, let's leave it there!
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#599Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're in agreement, so what did I misread? :D The point is, there's not some realistic, single-point "if only" scenario where "things could have been different", because the problem is largely Congress.
You misread/missed "Imagine".
No. The "imagine" is only an elaboration on the (rather more definite) "things could have been different" claim, which I already contend is a fantasy. I mean, sure, I could also "imagine" a world where America throws out its corrupt and/or stupid politicians all at once and replaces them with sensible people, but it would be of similar plausibility and utility.
Re: Google Has Removed MV2 Extensions from the Chrome Web Store, Including UBO
#600I 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.
They are in a tough place. They dont have the advantage of owning the OS (android/chrome and iOS / Safari) nor the advantage of advertising on the google home page like chrome. The "customers" they are courting are security/privacy zealots who constantly want them "just work on the browser" but never seem to have an answer on how to pay for that. I am hoping the advent of LLMs allows more entrants into the space at a…
> The "customers" they are courting are security/privacy zealots who constantly want them "just work on the browser" but never seem to have an answer on how to pay for that.
We all know how that was paid for. Google. But instead of taking that money stream and investing it 100% into making it the best browser ever, they pursued a myriad of fancy distractions. Yes, making a sustainable browser project is hard. Making a sustainable browser project while being constantly distracted by side project and political activism [1] is even harder. I am not saying if Mozilla stayed focused the win would be guaranteed. But I am pretty sure doing it like they are doing it guarantees failure.
[1] https://blog.mozilla.org/blogarchive/blog/2021/01/08/we-need...