Well, the web is unusable without an adblocker.
Time to move to another browser.
"Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
251–260 of 490 posts
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#252Manifest V3 is not the problem itself. But removing webRequestBlocking and creating some ridiculous limits for the DNR api are, these changes should be reversed downstream.
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
Security and possibly performance, which is the selling point of MV3.
Yup, the MV3 version requires zero permissions and in theory should be faster. These are real benefits that for some reason nobody will admit exist. Saying anything positive about MV3 or the lite extension seems to get you downvoted without explanation though, which is a nice example of how absurd this site is when it comes to anything related to Google. Sometimes I think downvoting should require leaving a comment a…
Sounds like the real issue is "we are replacing X with Y" and there are use-cases for both X and Y to co-exist.
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that Brave's creator opposes same sex marriage, is a Coronavirus "skeptic", and his silly cryptocurrency is made to work with brave browser.
Brave's creator, B. Eich, also created JavaScript, so I assume you have that disabled everywhere.
Oh I wish.
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won’t be touching this binary with a ten foot pole until every line of code is open. Many excellent alternatives already exist that are also open and free, I don’t see a compelling argument to use this software on any device at the moment.
Curious why exactly and what is wrong with closed source paid for products? By that token nobody should be touching Safari or iOS/macOS for that matter?
> By that token nobody should be touching Safari or iOS/macOS for that matter?
Ideally, yes.
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#256Totally unrelated, firefox is an excellent browser
But not when you want to install GrapheneOS using the web-based installer, because Mozilla refuses to implement WebUSB
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#257... can we just have a browser that has the functionality of uBlock Origin built-in?
Feeling nostalgic for a time when browsing HTTP wasn't such a persistently-adversarial experience :(
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#258I've finally switched (back) to firefox today. I switched from firefox to chrome for their superior devtools a few years back, but hopefully firefox has had time to catch up. Everything old is new again!
IMO they are still not as good although they have improved. I just develop in chrome and use Firefox for everything else.
What makes them less good? I'm used to Firefox and while the Chrome devtools have more features they're harder to use (eg smaller touch targets, can't accept JS suggestion with enter key)
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but we saw this coming a mile away (as in, people have been saying this about Chrome for about a decade). People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. But, everyone did, and this is what we get for it. We now have proprietary DRM built in to the web standards, and all kinds of other bullshit, because a bunch of people decided to not learn any lessons…
Google made something better than what existed with Chrome, it was obvious it would capture the market significantly especially among more technical people. I don't think the fact that Chrome is (was) better is the question, it's a question of how they got here. Google took tons of money and threw it into Chrome and therefore developed something better. It's better because Google put more money into it than anyone el…
It was only true that Chrome was significantly superior (performance-wise, anyway) for a little while. Firefox had to play catch up and it took several years. It was (mostly) called the "electrolysis" (a.k.a., "e10s") project. It was considered complete by 2018, and had already offered significant performance and stability improvements for years before then.
I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome still performs better on Google-owned web sites, for obvious reasons. But, nobody is really going to notice a difference between Firefox and Chrome when visiting, e.g., your bank's web site.
So, it's been somewhere between six and eight years that Firefox has had comparable performance, comparable web dev tools, and way cooler extensions. I'm sure plenty of people will reply that this isn't true and there was some website just this week that FORCES them to stay with Chrome because they noticed a jitter once, but people on the internet are top-tier experts at rationalizing and I don't buy it.
We could've all jumped on board with Firefox when the e10s project landed, but nobody did because it was just slightly less convenient to switch than to not. I hope it was worth it for them.
Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I remember right then the difference is more about ad-tracking/privacy than blocking. V2 allowed UBO to find and intercept the calls to the ad servers before the calls were made. Where V3+UBL still makes the calls it just doesn't display the results. So while you might not see the ads, the ads see you.
On the contrary, MV2 used onBeforeRequest which let extensions see what requests you were making. They could then take that data and use it for malicious purposes. MV3 doesn’t allow extensions to know what requests are being made, so extensions can’t use your data maliciously. Requests to ads that are blocked are blocked. I think you’re thinking of Privacy-preserving ad measurement which is an option in Firefox and S…
> On the contrary, MV2 used onBeforeRequest which let extensions see what requests you were making. They could then take that data and use it for malicious purposes.
Which is something we know for a fact uBlock Origin doesn't do. It's open source, you can check the code yourself. MV3, on the other hand, doesn't do much to assure me that an addon isn't phoning home. Why not just give the user to ability to block network requests on a per-addon basis? Too difficult a task for the trillion dollar company? Or could it be that forcing users to switch to MV3 addons isn't about safety at all?