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

AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

adguard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 371 posts

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#291

Post by tristan957 »

Karunamon wrote: post #266
cycomanic wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this reasoning. On one hand everyone complained that Firefox was to slow to bloated could be brought down by extensions etc. and moved to chrome because it was faster. Then Firefox implemented changes to make it faster, isolate extensions etc. and everyone complains that they killed them off and doesn't think of the users. Now we have the situation that people say they can trust Mozilla, because of…

Chrome is not to be trusted; this I agree with. Chromium forks on the other hand, like brave or vivaldi, have none of these problems. The former has already committed to not implementing this garbage restriction on blockers. Chromium's engine is solid from a technical standpoint and doesn't have any inherent privacy issues aside from being owned by Google engineers. If it sounds like I'm holding Firefox to a higher s…

You think a crypto company and a closed-source browser have your best interests at heart?

You do you.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#292

Post by taiiat »

Fatnino wrote: post #205
ameshkov wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of boycotting will only work when widely supported by both developers and users and this is not the case. Despite all the public outcry and news outlets telling that the end is near, it didn't affect the Chrome's share. > Without us chrome would likely not be in the position it is today and google could not dictate the terms like they do. I kind of disagree with this. Google Chrome's current popularity stan…

If suddenly there was no ad blocking available on Chrome cold turkey we would see nearly all users who are accustomed to an ad free experience go looking for a new browser. Coordinate this with a marketing blitz from Firefox and essentially you can take nearly all the Chrome ad block users and turn them into Firefox users. And from there it's word of mouth even from the non-techies. Good ad blocking is an essential p…

If suddenly there was no ad blocking available on Chrome cold turkey we would see nearly all users who are accustomed to an ad free experience go looking for a new browser

so.... Utopic best case scenario, 30% of the users? and that's if 100% of People using AdBlocking across the entire Planet were to make a move. and those are the users that don't provide any Revenue back to the Owner, anyways. the average user is using official Chrome, with very few Plugins, maybe like Reddit Enhancement, extra Twitch Emotes, Et Cetera.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#293

Post by ehsankia »

nfriedly wrote: post #259

Wow, that whole article and not a single mention of Firefox! Firefox still supports Manifest V2, which allows for more efficient and accurate blocking of advertising. (Among other things.)

Because that's off topic? I'm tired of seeing every single thread about MV3 turn into "Switch to Firefox". Yes, we know about that obvious solution, it's been shouted ad nauseum, I'm interested to see and hear about how ad blockers will work on MV3, not the existing alternative we've already heard about a billion times.

Just look at this very thread, every other comment is just about Firefox and not the content of the post itself.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#295

Post by nfriedly »

hoffs wrote: post #294
nfriedly wrote: post #259

Wow, that whole article and not a single mention of Firefox! Firefox still supports Manifest V2, which allows for more efficient and accurate blocking of advertising. (Among other things.)

Chrome also still supports manifest V2

Not for long

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#296

Post by NeverFade »

HWR_14 wrote: post #284
NeverFade wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIUC, the only problem with Mv3 is that they disabled the WebRequest API. A fork of Chromium that solves this problem will just have to re-enable the WebRequest API, which seems doable.

Isn't the lack of a WebRequest API one of the primary changes in Manifest v3?

It's apparently quite possible to keep supporting the WebRequest API in Mv3, since Firefox is doing just that.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#297

Post by cypress66 »

jacooper wrote: post #212
Havoc wrote: post #176

Firefox seems pretty much on par with chrome these days and FF seems to win out on detection rates anyway so not sure why I'd want this combo? https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b... Does anyone has stats of adguard vs ublock by chance?

Firefox on android is horrible. Full of bugs and slow downs.

Also it has a non native scroll behavior that is awful and a deal breaker to me.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#298

Post by hoffs »

somehnacct3757 wrote: post #217
staticassertion wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably that permission does not mean the same thing in v3. That is, the site can still read/modify data but, of course, only through the specific declarative APIs that delegate the work to the browser .

MV3 splits permissions into host permissions and classical permissions (tabs, storage, etc). Putting in your host permission list means that whatever the extension does, it can do it on all possible urls you may visit in the browser. In this sense, it's no different than in MV2. What's different is the classical permissions. Previously you could use the webRequest permission to execute custom JS functions in response…

It's a big difference between letting extension provide some rules and letting extension do whatever it wants with the request.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#299

Post by nfriedly »

ehsankia wrote: post #293
nfriedly wrote: post #259

Wow, that whole article and not a single mention of Firefox! Firefox still supports Manifest V2, which allows for more efficient and accurate blocking of advertising. (Among other things.)

Because that's off topic? I'm tired of seeing every single thread about MV3 turn into "Switch to Firefox". Yes, we know about that obvious solution, it's been shouted ad nauseum, I'm interested to see and hear about how ad blockers will work on MV3, not the existing alternative we've already heard about a billion times. Just look at this very thread, every other comment is just about Firefox and not the content of th…

Sure, I'm "preaching to the quior" here, but given Firefox's current market share, I'm not sure we've gotten the word out much beyond our circle.

The article mentioned Safari a couple of times, I don't see why the fact that Firefox will support both V2 and V3 indefinitely doesn't deserve a single mention.

Moreover, manifest V3 was essentially a massive middle finger from Google to everyone else (except advertisers), and it feels almost dishonest to discuss it wothout mentioning that there are better options out there.

Re: AdGuard publishes the first ad blocker built on Manifest V3

#300

Post by hoffs »

drexlspivey wrote: post #33
vbezhenar wrote: post #2

Are we going to lose ublock origin on chrome when v2 will be disabled?

World's biggest ad company getting rid of ad-blockers, who could see that coming? > Chromium got its webRequest API at a time it was trying to gain market share against Firefox (Sep 2011), where Adblock Plus, Ghostery, Disconnect, NoScript, and other such extensions were the most or among the most popular extensions on Firefox. So the only reason they even implemented this browser standard was to gain market share an…

Have you not read the article before posting the comment? Ad blocking is nowhere near being killed
Post reply on HN