Why are people on HN still using Chrome? (or Edge, or Opera…)
It's fast. All websites work. I like how it handles tabs and tab groups. uBO Lite is good enough for me.
Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
381–390 of 480 posts
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ship has already sailed, it's called DoH. Please note, that it is to make your DNS safer and has absolutely nothing to do with removing your ability to resolve DNS in whatever way you want to(cough adblock cough).
How does DoH remove any capabilities of what the resolver can respond to queries with? I block ads via a DoH resolver.
DoH is intended to be indistinguishable from HTTPS traffic, if the application specifies a specific DoH server a DNS based ad block will not work.
Right now The ad companies have not really figured this out and DoH largely works like port 53 DNS did. But give it a few years. They will up their game and our ability to mitm our own dns queries will vanish. I will miss it.
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#383Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#384Why are people on HN still using Chrome? (or Edge, or Opera…)
Because it works and I don't have any compelling issues that would cause me to switch. I switched to Brave a while back (cause built in ad blocking) and have been quite content with it.
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
uBO lite struggles with dynamically inserted ads. I’m not sure if it works with YouTube midrolls, I haven’t tried it. I did try paramount plus months ago though, which uBlock handles but Lite doesn’t. That’s not really an intended use case for an adblocker though, IMO, so maybe it’s fine. And, maybe it’s improved by now.
> I did try paramount plus months ago though, which uBlock handles but Lite doesn’t. That’s not really an intended use case for an adblocker though, IMO, so maybe it’s fine. What was not an intended use case for an ad blocker in your opinion? To block ads in video? Why?
I mean because paramount plus has an ad free tier, which I don’t pay for. In my mind adblockers are primarily a security and performance tool, not a tool to circumvent paying. That’s a nice side effect though.
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Chrome is the better browser, lelz.
I'll bite: why is it better? Did you try Safari or Firefox or Brave, and find deficiencies you can't live with?
The UI is just better overall. Ever since Chrome came out with the "unified search bar" imho Firefox was behind in usability. Firefox just follows. Like recently didn't they add tab groups after Chrome implemented them?
Isn't Brave based on Chrome?
Personally I think it is really stupid to choose a browser based on privacy. I choose a browser based on usability. Whats the selling point of Brave? That it hides ads?
Safari's OK if you're on Mac. I'm on Windows 11. Chrome looks tight, the tabs look great, my bookmarks bar looks great and I can fit a ton of bookmark folders on there. Firefox looks worse in almost every way.
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#387uBlock Origin Lite works just as well. I don't see any ads anywhere. My experience has not changed one yota. People just like to rage against Google. https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/... It's even available on iOS, I have it running in Safari
uBlock Origin Lite's author disagreed.[1] [1] https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...
I've never had to configure anything in uBO, it works great out of the box.
Therefore uBOL experience is practically the same. I haven't seen a single ads in months of browsing.
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#388Earlier quoted context omitted.
Find me a browser that doesn't have ai shoved into it... and no I don't mean 10 year old versions of iceweasel.
Firefox has a single switch to turn off all AI functionality. Does Chrome have it?
I'd rather the code not be there at all, if they leave a toggle for it, they're likely to turn it on without my permission. Mozilla has little trust in my book after mr robot and their other nonsense.
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox has a single switch to turn off all AI functionality. Does Chrome have it?
I'd rather the code not be there at all, if they leave a toggle for it, they're likely to turn it on without my permission. Mozilla has little trust in my book after mr robot and their other nonsense.
So you trust Google who is killing any protection from tracking but do not trust Mozilla that supports a strong protection?
Re: Chrome is looking to permanently drop MV2 extension
#390Just remember that Google is essentially an advertising company and that they were always going to squeeze this opening closed as soon as they could get away with it. I do fear for a future were even Firefox ends up caving in. Ladybird browser might be our only hope until something legal comes along to block functionality.
Good news is there are many viable Firefox forks currently and I’m sure some of them could take the wheel. It is open source, after all. It would be a shame to lose the Mozilla foundation/Firefox but it wouldn’t be the end of the browser.
Absolutely there are forks, they are what I run. But the majority of the work on the foundations still come primarily from Mozilla.
My fear is that, let's say Mozilla falls or shrinks considerably. It would take only a few complex but rationalised technologies from Google via chrome for Firefox and it's derivatives to fall behind. It already feels like they are constantly chasing instead of innovating and it wouldn't take much for them to fall behind on even that.
Personally, when they killed of the Servo team, that was a sign of their future. It was the team that was prototyping new web technologies long before they were mainstream ready. A lot of their stuff had been deployed into the main releases to great effect. The huge performance jump when they switched to the Quantum rendering system on version 68+ was a lot of their work. Then a few years back Mozilla just killed it off. It basically said they don't want to consider future technologies they are happy following. I don't see Firefox going away anytime soon but I'm not sure what shape it will be in a decade.