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

"Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

developer.chrome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 490 posts

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#321

Post by aftbit »

EasyMark wrote: post #125
kbolino wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is important, I think, to understand that personal computing is just one part of the picture. "Enterprise" environments (governments, businesses, large organizations, etc.) have demanded many of these "features" even before Google started implementing them. Your workplace, by and large, does not want you, the replaceable person who happens to be sitting at the keyboard, to be in full control of the device that the…

Then they could have made Mv3 an option to turn on by sysadmins who lock down their browsers. If you aren’t locking down your users browsers then that’s on you. I mean at worst they could have made mv2 opt-in and most people would have highly curtailed their complaints of “I’ll jump ship to _____________” . People don’t like it when features are removed especially when there are viable alternatives like, adding a spe…

Well to some extent they did make it Mv3 an option, not forever but for an extra few months, with that enterprise policy flag. Enterprises used their weight to demand not a more secure browser, but an extra flag to allow them to keep running old software longer. Enterprises too are treated as a security threat by Google, who still plans to depreciate Mv2 format, forcing them to move to "more secure" extensions.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#322

Post by ikekkdcjkfke »

btown wrote: post #51
emaro wrote: post #12

For people that have somehow missed the story, manifest v3 removed support for certain powerful network apis, severly limiting ad-blockers capabilities. uBlock Origin will not work anymore without manifest v2 (there's a v3 compatible lite version of uBlock Origin).

It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issueco... discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 - and while there's no plan yet to discontinue the Chrome MV3 compatible version, there are a million ways that this c…

Looks like FF got unlucky with a subcontractor that is "manually reviewing" extensions on the cheap

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#323

Post by andmalc »

bambax wrote: post #231
Sophira wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you certain? The last I heard about it from Vivaldi[0], they were only going to keep the MV2 code around so long as it's in the upstream codebase: > We will keep Manifest v2 for as long as it’s still available in Chromium. We expect to drop support in June 2025, but we may maintain it longer or be forced to drop support for it sooner, depending on the precise nature of the changes to the code. Note that June 2025…

But... what could possibly be the point of using a chromium based browser that is not Chrome, if not for MV2 support?

MS Edge, Arc, and Sidekick have features Chrome doesn't such as split screen, side panels, and vertical tabs. Likewise for Firefox forks such as Zen.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#324

Post by IncreasePosts »

vehemenz wrote: post #300
IncreasePosts wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chromium is open source, you're free to use it.

This is irrelevant because the changes are occurring upstream in Chromium by mostly Google developers.

Open source also means you're free to fork it or freeze your version

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#325

Post by sys_64738 »

chlorion wrote: post #234
bad_user wrote: post #213

Earlier 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…

Which GOOG team are you on?

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#326

Post by andrewjf »

faefox wrote: post #5

Switch to a different browser! The Chrome monopoly only exists because we collectively allow it to exist.

Same with all the other google ecosystem. Gmail, maps, android. All just mechanisms for data collection and ad networks.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#327

Post by justinclift »

btown wrote: post #51
emaro wrote: post #12

For people that have somehow missed the story, manifest v3 removed support for certain powerful network apis, severly limiting ad-blockers capabilities. uBlock Origin will not work anymore without manifest v2 (there's a v3 compatible lite version of uBlock Origin).

It's worth noting that the maintenance of the "lite" version is at some nonzero risk of burnout for its developers, ironically in part due to Mozilla being unnecessarily hostile: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/issues/197#issueco... discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418 - and while there's no plan yet to discontinue the Chrome MV3 compatible version, there are a million ways that this c…

> My only long-term hope for this space ...

Some of the anti-monopoly investigations of Google might achieve this too.

The removal of MV2 is extremely clearly Google abusing their dominant market position to line their pockets at the expense of their users.

When this goes through, there will be another EU anti-monopoly investigation just for this.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#328

Post by contravariant »

zb3 wrote: post #256
Mrdarknezz wrote: post #29

Totally 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

Sounds like a reasonable trade-off.

I imagine they couldn't figure out what an appropriate warning window would look like for that kind of protocol.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#329

Post by PKop »

ParetoOptimal wrote: post #109
lemagedurage wrote: post #64

For people who want to stick with a Chrome-based browser while still using the full-featured uBlock Origin: Brave will keep supporting uBlock Origin even after Manifest V2's removal from Chromium. https://brave.com/blog/brave-shields-manifest-v3/

Note that Brave's creator opposes same sex marriage, is a Coronavirus "skeptic", and his silly cryptocurrency is made to work with brave browser.

Nothing wrong with any of those positions. And largely irrelevant to whether he's good at his job and whether Brave is a good browser which it is for various reasons, one of which being he leads the company.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#330

Post by rpdillon »

tourmalinetaco wrote: post #302
Raed667 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they just don't want to admit publicly that they're too small to maintain a fork when it diverges this much

Well Vivaldi is open source, right? Personally I would be reaching out to Brave, who already plans on maintaining V2 support, and see about a joint venture with a forked chromium.

I was intensely interested in this, and after much reading, here's my best understanding:

Neither Brave nor Vivaldi are proposing to maintain engine support for v2: they both point to the codebase retaining support after Chrome drops support (likely for enterprise) as being the driver of their ability to offer v2. Both say that once those codepaths are removed, so too will v2 support be removed from Vivaldi and Brave.

No idea when Google will make that call.

Post reply on HN