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

371–380 of 490 posts

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

#371

Post by zamadatix »

cookiengineer wrote: post #370
zamadatix wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your personal site is awesome by the way! Though I got too excited about the CV "challenge" until I read on GitHub it really is just a random password you hand out to people and not a "find the secret password somewhere and trigger its" somewhere :p. Cookie invaders gave me a good shock too :D. As well as the random "bloop" sounds. 10/10

Haha, thanks for the flowers. I tried to make my website fun to use while not sacrifing backwards compatibility. PS: The crypto challenge is related to the song that the avatar is humming :)

Well, shit... now I must resist the urge to go back and figure it out! I've got things to do this weekend, couldn't you have lied and said it wasn't really a challenge! ;)

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

#372

Post by endgame »

ragnese wrote: post #243
echelon wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why we need to break up Google. Google is a de facto monopoly. They own the entire web. The gateway, the browser, the protocols, advertising, discovery. Google is too big.

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…

I criticise Mozilla in tech circles, I recommend Firefox and a working adblocker to friends and family, and I donate to Ladybird. What else should I be doing?

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

#373

Post by eviks »

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?

Customization. There are a lot of bad designs in the original Chrome that can be fixed in a fork

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

#374

Post by cookiengineer »

zamadatix wrote: post #371
cookiengineer wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha, thanks for the flowers. I tried to make my website fun to use while not sacrifing backwards compatibility. PS: The crypto challenge is related to the song that the avatar is humming :)

Well, shit... now I must resist the urge to go back and figure it out! I've got things to do this weekend, couldn't you have lied and said it wasn't really a challenge! ;)

Yeah when I built that I was way too deep in the steganographic rabbit hole. Might have to rework it at some point, because it needs a deep understanding of how to use statistical analysis to find a key/alphabet, and the frames that don't match the previous audio frame so that the codec skips them as corrupt frames. It was the year after 3301 so well...I kind of overdid it :D

Maybe something assembly related would be fun to do, too. These days I am reversing lots of malware, so sth like patching a binary so that it evolves into a different program similar to how APE does it would be a fun challenge, I guess :D

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

#375

Post by eviks »

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…

"in theory" is not a real benefit

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

#376

Post by askvictor »

QuantumGood wrote: post #222

"browsers using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will be exempt from any browser changes until June 2025" To extend ManifestV2 in Chrome, add the text below to a text file, saving and running it as a .reg will create and add a value of 2 to "ExtensionManifestV2Availability" in the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Google\Chrome key (When you open/run a .reg file, it updates your registry, usually preceed…

What about Linux and Mac?

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

#377

Post by askvictor »

freedomben wrote: post #17

Notably, Firefox is not removing v2 support (at least for now as of March 2024) > Firefox, however, has no plans to deprecate MV2 and will continue to support MV2 extensions for the foreseeable future. And even if we re-evaluate this decision at some point down the road, we anticipate providing a notice of at least 12 months for developers to adjust accordingly and not feel rushed. [1] [1]: https://blog.mozilla.org/a…

I guess I'll be moving my work browser across to firefox as well (moved personal across a year ago when these shenanigans started)

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

#378

Post by eviks »

If only Mozilla hadn't wasted all that time and money and created a Chrome-comparable in stability/performance and Vivaldi-comparable in customization, we could've have an easy way out of this current mess...

(v3 drops not only ad-blockers but also user style managers, so a significant degradation of the web interfaces)

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

#379

Post by TexanFeller »

eviks wrote: post #378

If only Mozilla hadn't wasted all that time and money and created a Chrome-comparable in stability/performance and Vivaldi-comparable in customization, we could've have an easy way out of this current mess... (v3 drops not only ad-blockers but also user style managers, so a significant degradation of the web interfaces)

I daily drive Firefox. I haven't found a single website in years that's made me open Chrome. There's nothing slow about Firefox.

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

#380

Post by eviks »

crazygringo wrote: post #352
pkasting wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Explain to me how uBlock Origin can realistically go from 100,000 to 500,000 dynamic rules down to 30k rules(only 5k of those can be dynamic) in the Lite version without losing the ability to actually block everything? I will take this one. First, your limits are out of date. The static minimum is 30k, but can now escalate to an order of magnitude higher depending on how many extensions are installed. The dynamic l…

Thank you for providing this valuable explanation -- I haven't heard this perspective expressed elsewhere. The fact that old rules would never get deleted but continue to drain resources makes some design decisions make a lot more sense.

Now consider that the extra drain can be practically zero, and you get back to those decisions making less sense
Post reply on HN