Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is an easy alternative: Use Firefox
that doesn't fix the problem, though.
Doesn't it? Product A is bad, thus use Product B. That's how most of my problems with different products are solved.
Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
171–180 of 215 posts
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox has a much worse history than Chrome when it comes to breaking extensions.
Like what? I can't imagine firefox has done anything worse then MV3.
Oh, I don't know, maybe breaking literally all of their extension with the deprecation of XUL?
I'm a happy firefox user, and I'm pretty sure it was the right choice IMO, as firefox is certainly much more stable and fast now than it was before. But it was certainly a very, very rough process and left some very popular extensions broken without alternatives for months and even years before the necessary APIs were added to webextensions to bring them back.
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there is one group of people I will never feel bad for, it's the VPN / proxy vendors. They've been doing false advertising for years on every channel, making consumers pay for absolutely useless products.
VPNs are quite useful in the UK. A fair number of sites are blocked by ISPs for various reasons.
I'm in the UK, almost all the blocked sites are unblocked just by changing DNS servers. No need to give all your data to a ~middleman~ man in the middle for that.
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does your extension work on Firefox? If yes, have you considered explaining the situation to your users to encourage them to move to Firefox?
Firefox has a much worse history than Chrome when it comes to breaking extensions.
They also have a much longer history than Chrome.
Kinda glad they disallowed the extensions that had near unfettered access to browser internals.
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
That looks expected to me. The zoom setting controls web page zoom.
I give up.
Amusing response.
In any case, I checked out Chromium, and the equivalent setting is labeled "Page zoom" and affects extension popovers as well. As far as I know, extension popovers are not web pages, so your expectation (and Chromium's behavior) seem to be a bug - either in the settings UI, or in the way the zoom setting affects extension popovers.
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does your extension work on Firefox? If yes, have you considered explaining the situation to your users to encourage them to move to Firefox?
Firefox has a much worse history than Chrome when it comes to breaking extensions.
Context for the curious: https://yoric.github.io/post/why-did-mozilla-remove-xul-addo...
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#177Not trying to throw ML at the wall, but could it be used for this problem (considering all other options seem to be failing)? As far as I understand, after MV3, ad blockers won't be able to use a long list of ads to remove them. How about using a simple ML algorithm to detect whether the request is a genuine one or an advertisement? I am sure that getting training data wouldn't be too hard (all the ad lists that will…
The point of the change is to go from allowing extensions unfettered access to read, rewrite and exfiltrate everything you request, to forcing them to declare upfront what they will block.
Sure, there are still going to be some work arounds that still allow extensions to read and change what a user sees, but anyone looking at this honestly can see what the intention is.
Throwing ML at this problem doesn't make sense at all as reading and then rewriting requests is exactly what Google doesn't want extensions doing anymore.
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is EU when you need them with their anti-trust litigation. Google is pulling a 2000s Microsoft.
There is an easy alternative: Use Firefox
these days many website don't work in firefox. And the worst thing is you never know it was firefox that was causing problem. Last time I tried to login verizon it didn't work. Same with many website I can't remember on top of my head.
I still can't leave firefox due to multi containers tho :(
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
It greatly restricts how effective ad blockers can be.
Proxy extensions are not the same as adblockers.
Maybe the entire Manifest V3 concept is "Gish Gallop" applied to software design. Create so much of a bag of questionable features that people are just trying to keep up with the nonsense, and hopefully it keeps us divided and unable to actually able to mount a solid response to their (not really buried) real goal, which is to stab at the ad-blocker industry.
It would be interesting to consider their business values on proxies too; while on the abstract level, it dilutes tracking data quality (I don't really live inside a data centre in Stockholm?!), it might improve the value of their more broadly aggregated data (we've seen this user's fingerprint elsewhere, so we can give you a more accurate location than Geo-IP lookup does)
Re: Proxy Chrome extensions are not going to be usable in MV3
#180As a proxy extension developer, this is absolutely maddening. We're forced to choose between auth-less open proxies (bad), or baking in a wacky authentication scheme through a side channel (also bad). MV3 drops in 2.5 months, and will leave tens of millions of proxy extension users unable to use products they paid money for. This is all on top of the many other issues with MV3 that Google is pushing under the guise o…
No post body was provided.