Live data from Hacker News

Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

zdnet.com

21–30 of 169 posts

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#21
>>Google changes stance on upcoming Chrome Manifest V3 changes as benchmark shows they lied about performance hit.....Hours after the Ghostery team published its study and benchmark results, the Chrome team backtracked on their planned modifications.

Adios Google that once was. Ad blocking does cause performance issues, but revenue ones.

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#22

>> Google changes stance on upcoming Chrome Manifest V3 changes as benchmark shows they lied about performance hit.....Hours after the Ghostery team published its study and benchmark results, the Chrome team backtracked on their planned modifications. Adios Google that once was. Ad blocking does cause performance issues, but revenue ones.

I wouldn't really trust the Ghostery team either. They don't exactly have the best track record.

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#23

Duh, everyone knew that this was a non-issue. Now prepare for every other comment to be about how you should still be using Firefox.

I don't know about should, but Firefox is a fine browser that is worth trying out.

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#24

>> Google changes stance on upcoming Chrome Manifest V3 changes as benchmark shows they lied about performance hit.....Hours after the Ghostery team published its study and benchmark results, the Chrome team backtracked on their planned modifications. Adios Google that once was. Ad blocking does cause performance issues, but revenue ones.

I wouldn't really trust the Ghostery team either. They don't exactly have the best track record.

Google should point out the study faults then...it's not like they don't have the manpower and know-how

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#25
They've done nothing of the sort. The ZDNet article quotes:

> "Another clarification is that the webRequest API is not going to be fully removed as part of Manifest V3," said Chrome engineer Devlin Cronin [emphasis his].

But the full quote shows what he's talking about:

> Another clarification is that the webRequest API is not going to be fully removed as part of Manifest V3. In particular, there are currently no planned changes to the observational capabilities of webRequest (i.e., anything that does not modify the request). We are also continually listening to and evaluating the feedback we’re receiving, and we are still narrowing down proposed changes to the webRequest API.

The only commitment is to not modify the read-only "observational capabilities".

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#26
As people said in the thread about the actual study, this isn't a real backtrack, they're still locking down the rules, just being a bit more accommodating to the current gen of adblock, but the second ads adapt around current tech, adblockers will be stuck in the mud.

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#27

Things like this is why it is so important for the web to have multiple browsers available to choose from.

And that's why this announcement should make people switch to alternatives with different engine like FF.

Saying we need multiple browsers, then using chrome or its clone actually makes the situation worse.

Also chrome is no longer snappy as it was initially.

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#28

Things like this is why it is so important for the web to have multiple browsers available to choose from.

That's all fine in principle but in practice Web Browsers just like Search Engines is zero sum. Sooner or later it'll just be one.

Re: Google backtracks on Chrome modifications that would have crippled ad blockers

#29
post #27

Things like this is why it is so important for the web to have multiple browsers available to choose from.

And that's why this announcement should make people switch to alternatives with different engine like FF. Saying we need multiple browsers, then using chrome or its clone actually makes the situation worse. Also chrome is no longer snappy as it was initially.

Playing devils advocate here, why a different engine is needed? Chrome clone can add webrequest feature too, and it would be much easier to maintain.
Post reply on HN