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

Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

bleepingcomputer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 448 posts

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#151

Post by pmlnr »

rusk wrote: post #143
moomin wrote: post #15

This is the point in the dominance cycle where the dominant player decides they no longer need to be the fastest or the most secure and that their dominance will allow them to coast along doing their thing. There’s nothing particularly inevitable about what happens next, but let’s hope they get an IE6-sized kick in the teeth.

has anyone else noticed a marked decline in the quality of Google search results over the last 12 months? I swear, around about 2011 I thought Google was going to become self aware but it's declined from that high-point to a point where duckduckgo has become a viable alternative for more than just reasons of privacy. Which is a great thing! Turns out "Don't be Evil" was more than just a feel-good marketing slogan. It…

> over the last 12 months

More like since 2014.

I use google search for one thing only these days: product search, when I'm trying to find a local dealer for a product.

For everything else, duckduckgo, which, to be completely honest, is a lot more like the old google from the early 2000s, than the current google.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#152

Post by alpaca128 »

square_usual wrote: post #101
Ensorceled wrote: post #87

Like so many others on this thread, this is my push to go entirely back onto Firefox. I'll keep Chrome for the diminishing number of sites that don't like Firefox.

You can use Brave as your Chromium-based browser. It blocks ads natively, and I've not yet run into a site that required Chrome that didn't work on Brave.

Suggesting a browser because it has adblock preinstalled is like recommending a specific Linux distribution because it comes with LibreOffice out of the box: it doesn't matter for anyone who can click 2-3 buttons.

What matters to me is the part I can't influence that easily, and I simply prefer Firefox because it's not based on Chrome. Not something many browser developers can say nowadays.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#153

Post by pmlnr »

gnom69 wrote: post #71
me_me_me wrote: post #34

Meanwhile me laughing in Firefox. I hope no one here is surprised by this G was more and more anti ad-blocking for years now. This is only natural conclusion after u are a de-facto browser monopoly.

Google captcha makes some sites almost unusable on firefox if you dare to resist fingerprinting for full traceability. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20147015

I see recaptcha, I walk. There's nothing else I can do. BTW if I turn on 1st party isolation in FF, I keep feeding the fire hydrant monster for hours.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#154

Post by naringas »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #107
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you don't share their opinion, you have to accept that some people honestly believe that advertising is necessary for funding the open Web and keep it open for people who either can't afford tons of subscriptions or hate them for privacy reasons. Realistically, Mr Vincent is not in charge of being an advocate for anything other than Google's corporate interests. But he is not in charge of destroying extension…

> ...advertising is necessary for funding the open Web and keep it open for people who either can't afford tons of subscriptions or hate them for privacy reasons That's a minor issue. The bigger issue is the fact that, if adblockers become truly popular, websites will go back to serving opaque binary blobs instead of HTML+CSS+JS. Remember Flash and 'Flash pages' back in the day? That, except worse.

> websites will go back to serving opaque binary blobs instead of HTML+CSS+JS.

they will just serve web assembly

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#155

Post by tyingq »

mda wrote: post #7

Does it really kill adblockers though?

It does kill the really effective ones like uBlock Origin by removing any ability to do heuristics, "right click to block", "IAB sized divs" and similar dynamic detection. The 30k limit is also too low. So, a bit of hyperbole, but it DOES kill the best blockers.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#156

Post by Ensorceled »

9dl wrote: post #123
square_usual wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can use Brave as your Chromium-based browser. It blocks ads natively, and I've not yet run into a site that required Chrome that didn't work on Brave.

Whut? Sites require chrome?

For the entire history of the internet, there have been sites that only work properly with the dominate browser, starting with Netscape and then, famously, IE6.

I'm always confused when people imply this isn't the case or start demanding evidence. I'm bemused when they are surprised.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#157

Post by cletus »

Did anyone actually read the submission? The title is clickbait that doesn't reflect the content.

The change here moves modifying content of the webRequest to the browser from the extension. This is fundamentally more secure. Allowing third-party extensions to inspect and _modify_ arbitrary HTTP requests is nothing short of dangerous.

The new declarative API (from the article) limits such extensions to 30,000 rules. I honestly don't know what impact this will have on ad blockers. At worst it seems like ad blockers will become less effective as simple logic tells you that some rules matter more than others and the least used rules will simply be dropped.

So rather than be alarmist and use this to feed into the tired narrative that "Google is killing ad blockers because it's an advertising company" (paraphrased) we should be pushing for changes that make this workable, such as:

1. Having a higher limit than 30,000; and

2. Working on ways to condense N rules into I honestly don't like the fact that I have to give a third party developer so much privileged access to run an ad blocker and I'm surprised anyone else is. Extensions can be compromised.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#158

Post by JulianMorrison »

NieDzejkob wrote: post #135
JulianMorrison wrote: post #83

They are being very stupid. Switching primary browser isn't trivial, but it's easier than wading through an ad-laden web. Goodbye Chrome, hello Firefox.

You're not their target. It's the less technical people they have in mind here.

Those people managed to switch from IE.

Chrome used to be the underdog.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#159

Post by Ensorceled »

square_usual wrote: post #101
Ensorceled wrote: post #87

Like so many others on this thread, this is my push to go entirely back onto Firefox. I'll keep Chrome for the diminishing number of sites that don't like Firefox.

You can use Brave as your Chromium-based browser. It blocks ads natively, and I've not yet run into a site that required Chrome that didn't work on Brave.

Thanks for the tip. I've seen some FUD around Brave and their browser but even if true they are still better than where Google is going.

Re: Google Begins Testing Extension Manifest V3 in Chrome Canary

#160

Post by big_chungus »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #107
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you don't share their opinion, you have to accept that some people honestly believe that advertising is necessary for funding the open Web and keep it open for people who either can't afford tons of subscriptions or hate them for privacy reasons. Realistically, Mr Vincent is not in charge of being an advocate for anything other than Google's corporate interests. But he is not in charge of destroying extension…

> ...advertising is necessary for funding the open Web and keep it open for people who either can't afford tons of subscriptions or hate them for privacy reasons That's a minor issue. The bigger issue is the fact that, if adblockers become truly popular, websites will go back to serving opaque binary blobs instead of HTML+CSS+JS. Remember Flash and 'Flash pages' back in the day? That, except worse.

I don't think sites will bake ads into the blob. It's too much server-side hassle. The equivalent today is just serving the ads from your own domain, and precious few people do that. The other option is a binary blob making a network request to an ad server, which can be blocked.
Post reply on HN