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

"Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

developer.chrome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 490 posts

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#101

Post by freedomben »

lapcat wrote: post #84

This submission title does not appear to be accurate. Here's what was actually said: > October 9th 2024: an update on Manifest V2 phase-out. > Over the last few months, we have continued with the Manifest V2 phase-out. Currently the chrome://extensions page displays a warning banner for all users of Manifest V2 extensions. Additionally, we have started disabling Manifest V2 extensions on pre-stable channels. > We wil…

The most relevant part is:

> Additionally, we have started disabling Manifest V2 extensions on pre-stable channels.

Title could have been a bit more broad (probably should say "pre-stable" instead of "canary"), but I would say it is inaccurate.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#102

Post by surajrmal »

crazygringo wrote: post #86
sho wrote: post #25

Hopefully this is the inflection point for Chrome. Despite all their made-up "security" reasons, everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective. For many users, adblock is what makes chrome bearable - and if they make it unbearable, then those users will leave. Slowly but surely. Google seems much too sure of itself making this change. I hope their arrogance pays off just the same as Microsoft's di…

> everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective I thought I knew that. Then I switched from uBlock Origin to uBlock Origin Lite in Chrome, which is compatible with Manifest v3. I was prepared for the horrible onslaught of ads, expecting at least a quarter would start getting through, ready to switch to Firefox... ...and didn't notice a single change. Not a single ad gets through. And at the same t…

People seem to see what they want. And many seem to be blinded by Google hate and must find ways to be unhappy with all decisions they make. Google has publicly delayed v2 depreciation to ensure ad blockers worked well under v3.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#103

Post by [deleted] »

kbolino wrote: post #78
freedomben wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed on hoping this is the inflection point, but only partial agreement that it's about adblock. For sure Google wants adblock to die, but I think it goes even deeper than that. I think it's part of a much bigger trend in tech in general but also in Google: Removing user control. When you look at the "security" things they are doing, many of them have a common philosophy underpinning them that the user (aka device…

It is important, I think, to understand that personal computing is just one part of the picture. "Enterprise" environments (governments, businesses, large organizations, etc.) have demanded many of these "features" even before Google started implementing them. Your workplace, by and large, does not want you, the replaceable person who happens to be sitting at the keyboard, to be in full control of the device that the…

[deleted]

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#104

Post by pentagrama »

> Users will be directed to the Chrome Web Store, where they will be recommended Manifest V3 alternatives for their disabled extension.

I'm curious about which extensions will be recommended to replace uBlock Origin after it's disabled. I'm sure those alternatives will see a surge in installs.

Also, why doesn't the creator of uBlock Origin update the V2 version to the V3 version? I know V3 version isn't as good as V2, but if you're developing that product, at least give your users something instead of leaving them with nothing. Otherwise, they may end up choosing poor alternatives.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#105

Post by [deleted] »

flohofwoe wrote: post #98
crazygringo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective I thought I knew that. Then I switched from uBlock Origin to uBlock Origin Lite in Chrome, which is compatible with Manifest v3. I was prepared for the horrible onslaught of ads, expecting at least a quarter would start getting through, ready to switch to Firefox... ...and didn't notice a single change. Not a single ad gets through. And at the same t…

> ...and didn't notice a single change. Not a single ad gets through. When I tried UBO Lite recently it couldn't block YouTube ads, not sure if that's impossible with Manifest V3, or if UBO Lite just isn't updated regularly like UBO to defeat the YouTube anti-ad-blocking updates. Update: looks like it's fixed now, not bad :)

[deleted]

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#106

Post by Cthulhu_ »

freedomben wrote: post #60
sho wrote: post #25

Hopefully this is the inflection point for Chrome. Despite all their made-up "security" reasons, everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective. For many users, adblock is what makes chrome bearable - and if they make it unbearable, then those users will leave. Slowly but surely. Google seems much too sure of itself making this change. I hope their arrogance pays off just the same as Microsoft's di…

Agreed on hoping this is the inflection point, but only partial agreement that it's about adblock. For sure Google wants adblock to die, but I think it goes even deeper than that. I think it's part of a much bigger trend in tech in general but also in Google: Removing user control. When you look at the "security" things they are doing, many of them have a common philosophy underpinning them that the user (aka device…

I get why they built in all of those protections; the vast majority of tech users are not knowledgeable about the details of the stuff they use. And I think a big chunk of those that are, overestimate their own abilities, knowledge, and control. They all need to be protected against themselves.

That said, I don't like that the choice is being taken away. If you do want to tinker at that level with the technology you own, you should be given the choice. By all means make it not obvious how to get there - like, have people reboot their computers while playing Twister on their keyboards with interesting key combos, but give them the option.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#107

Post by lapcat »

freedomben wrote: post #101
lapcat wrote: post #84

This submission title does not appear to be accurate. Here's what was actually said: > October 9th 2024: an update on Manifest V2 phase-out. > Over the last few months, we have continued with the Manifest V2 phase-out. Currently the chrome://extensions page displays a warning banner for all users of Manifest V2 extensions. Additionally, we have started disabling Manifest V2 extensions on pre-stable channels. > We wil…

The most relevant part is: > Additionally, we have started disabling Manifest V2 extensions on pre-stable channels. Title could have been a bit more broad (probably should say "pre-stable" instead of "canary"), but I would say it is inaccurate.

> The most relevant part is:

That's actually not the most relevant part. The most relevant part is "We will now begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable. This change will be slowly rolled out over the following weeks."

Google had already started disabling Manifest V2 extensions on pre-stable channels, prior to October 9.

The first paragraph is "what we've been doing." The second paragraph is "what we'll do now."

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#108

Post by Cthulhu_ »

flohofwoe wrote: post #98
crazygringo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective I thought I knew that. Then I switched from uBlock Origin to uBlock Origin Lite in Chrome, which is compatible with Manifest v3. I was prepared for the horrible onslaught of ads, expecting at least a quarter would start getting through, ready to switch to Firefox... ...and didn't notice a single change. Not a single ad gets through. And at the same t…

> ...and didn't notice a single change. Not a single ad gets through. When I tried UBO Lite recently it couldn't block YouTube ads, not sure if that's impossible with Manifest V3, or if UBO Lite just isn't updated regularly like UBO to defeat the YouTube anti-ad-blocking updates. Update: looks like it's fixed now, not bad :)

Youtube's adblocker-evasion and adblocker's youtube ad blocking has been a cat-and-mouse game since time immemorial.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#109

Post by ParetoOptimal »

lemagedurage wrote: post #64

For people who want to stick with a Chrome-based browser while still using the full-featured uBlock Origin: Brave will keep supporting uBlock Origin even after Manifest V2's removal from Chromium. https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/

Note that Brave's creator opposes same sex marriage, is a Coronavirus "skeptic", and his silly cryptocurrency is made to work with brave browser.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#110

Post by betaby »

arp242 wrote: post #39
est wrote: post #8

Can't we avoid the Manifest bullshit altogether? I remember how IE plugins roles: just dll inject into the process.

Why not avoid all this unnecessary DDL overhead and just load as a kernel module?

TempleOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TempleOS
Post reply on HN