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

331–340 of 490 posts

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

#331

Post by contravariant »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #305
lofaszvanitt wrote: post #303

V3 has some utterly/unnecessarily complicated shite going on, like offscreen documents, and I think it will get worse as time progresses. Google really needs some bludgeoning.

I have not kept up -what is the steel man argument for V3? Presumably Google has a rationale other than “ad blockers are bad for business”

Ad blocker-wise I think the best argument is that internalising the traffic blocking can be made a lot more efficient than putting a javascript interpreter in between.

The counter argument is that ad-blocking is an arms-race and the only reason a subset of traffic blocking methods is going to work at all is because there isn't a big enough incentive yet.

Other than that the arguments in favour of V3 are going to be about the same as for any API update. My guess is a few extra APIs and more granular permissions.

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

#332

Post by Jach »

ezst wrote: post #288
ttt3ts wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO they are still not as good although they have improved. I just develop in chrome and use Firefox for everything else.

I know chrome dev tools are capable, but to me they feel much more dumb and convoluted. There's lots of convenience and golden nuggets in Firefox dev tools that makes you feel they've been designed by and for developers.

My needs for webdev debugging have always been satisfied by Firefox, but last time I was really in the weeds ~4 years ago I had the feeling both it and Chrome were still missing things I took for granted with Firebug long ago.

I don't mind nice and powerful tools, but one thing I learned with Java (where the tools are so much nicer and so much more powerful) is that if you're leaning on them heavily, that's kind of a sign you've messed up. Like on the scale of severity (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts...), at least as severe as really bad coupling or brittleness. Thank goodness for the tools that let people efficiently figure things out and get on with things, but it's really better to have not needed to be in such a situation to begin with.

I have a similar view with valgrind -- amazing tool everyone would rather exist than not, one could imagine a "Google Valgrind" and "Mozilla Valgrind" competing on mild differences of amazing, but really, life is better if you can just use a managed language and never have to deal with any flavor of valgrind. I think there are ways to do webdev that significantly reduce the need to use any browser dev tools at all, though the domain necessitates some use. ClojureScript in 2014 was showing the way.

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

#333

Post by fatihpense »

Dalewyn wrote: post #312
r00fus wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. Do you not remember all the ads promoting chrome? First was chrome-frame IE extension, then came all the ads - then tie-ins where you got Chrome in addition when you really wanted some other app. They pushed it hard because they knew they had no real competitors and could eat up marketshare.

Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average) and it was modern and cool (read: only point of interest for nerds). Firefox failed because it stagnated on performance and code quality (read: memory leaks for daaaaaaaaays) and ultimately because Mozilla was corrupted by Mitchell Baker and still is to this very day driving away nerds and engineers by the truckload. Lest we forg…

Thanks for the unexpected laugh at the end. Maybe there is a typo in that imaginary world: "Applestantinople". But maybe it is as intended :)

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

#335

Post by userbinator »

freedomben wrote: post #60
sho wrote: post #25

Hopefully this is the inflection point for Chrome. Despite all their made-up "security" reasons, everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective. For many users, adblock is what makes chrome bearable - and if they make it unbearable, then those users will leave. Slowly but surely. Google seems much too sure of itself making this change. I hope their arrogance pays off just the same as Microsoft's di…

Agreed on hoping this is the inflection point, but only partial agreement that it's about adblock. For sure Google wants adblock to die, but I think it goes even deeper than that. I think it's part of a much bigger trend in tech in general but also in Google: Removing user control. When you look at the "security" things they are doing, many of them have a common philosophy underpinning them that the user (aka device…

I think it's part of a much bigger trend in tech in general but also in Google: Removing user control. When you look at the "security" things they are doing, many of them have a common philosophy underpinning them that the user (aka device owner) is a security threat and must be protected against.

IMHO that's actually part of an even bigger societal trend. "You will own nothing and be happy."

The ones in power want to control everyone and turn them into mindless sheeple to be exploited and milked. It's not just tech. There's another comment around here that mentions features being requested by large corporations and governments.

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

#336

Post by userbinator »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #50

I wish some brave enough (no relation to Brave) soul patched Blink so it became possible to delegate URL blocking decisions to an external process via some sort of IPC. In goes a full URL and maybe an opaque session ID so some state may be tracked, out goes a boolean value. Assume all are allowed if this process cannot be connected to.

You can already do this with a MITM proxy, and it works in all browsers.

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

#337

Post by userbinator »

kbolino wrote: post #78
freedomben wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed on hoping this is the inflection point, but only partial agreement that it's about adblock. For sure Google wants adblock to die, but I think it goes even deeper than that. I think it's part of a much bigger trend in tech in general but also in Google: Removing user control. When you look at the "security" things they are doing, many of them have a common philosophy underpinning them that the user (aka device…

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…

Ironically, the FBI recommends using an ad blocker: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41483581

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

#338

Post by Zak »

EasyMark wrote: post #131
Rychard wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The widespread adoption of Chrome was largely driven by word of mouth, people like you and I installing it on our friend's/relative's computers and telling them it was safer/faster/better. Nothing stops us from doing the same thing again. I've been recommending Firefox to all my family/friends/colleagues for years (ever since I've seen the writing on the wall for Chrome). While Firefox isn't perfect, it's in a much b…

Did you miss the barrage of ads for Chrome that google played for literally years on the internet and television?

Yes. Thanks adblock!

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

#339

Post by Zak »

spankalee wrote: post #220
sho wrote: post #25

Hopefully this is the inflection point for Chrome. Despite all their made-up "security" reasons, everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective. For many users, adblock is what makes chrome bearable - and if they make it unbearable, then those users will leave. Slowly but surely. Google seems much too sure of itself making this change. I hope their arrogance pays off just the same as Microsoft's di…

What makes you say the security reasons are made up?

I can take this question.

They removed webRequestBlocking, used mainly by adblockers, but left webRequest. The security implications are the same for both, but only the former is optimized for content blocking.

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

#340

Post by Uvix »

ragnese wrote: post #259
AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Chrome had better stability (not sure about performance) for nearly a decade - far more than "a little while". I gave Mozilla 3-4 years to catch up before finally switching to Chrome.

Even once e10s supposedly fixed their problems another 4 years down the road, I didn't see any reason to rush back. I've switched to another Chromium browser, but I'd rather try a new engine entirely like Ladybird than switch back to Mozilla, until they prove they're not going to let the browser stagnate for so long again.

Post reply on HN