41–50 of 63 posts
When people realize how insufferable the internet is without an Adblocker they’ll have no choice but switch to Firefox.
I'm not sure if that downside of Chrome will be enough to make many people switch – it's too slow a boil for many frogs to notice, I'm afraid.
I just installed uBlock Origin Lite and didn't see any difference between uBlock Origin on the sites I frequent. One thing I like about uBlock Lite is that it defaults to Basic mode which does not require the permission to read and modify data.
On my own computer, I prefer Firefox and the full version, but work doesn't allow "all site access" extensions in Chrome, and I'm really thankful for uBO Lite there.
I could definitely see myself switch on Firefox too, once most extensions move to the v3 security model. A hybrid would probably be ideal: v2-like blocking behavior on an opt-in basis per site for where it's needed, with a better default security posture where it isn't.
(Actually I wish Firefox would backport the v3-like "allow site access only after first extension button click" model that Chrome has backported even for v2 extensions, but that's pretty far down on my wishlist.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been a Firefox user forever (I used Chrome for a while, but switched back to Firefox many years ago), and I am still continually baffled that anyone "in the know" uses Chrome. But they do. And I doubt this change will cause any kind of Chrome exodus, if nothing else Google has done up to this point has triggered that.
Firefox tagged along after Safari put out an insulting piece trumpeting how much better they were for not implementing a bunch of web APIs. Lacking good links so far but here's this, https://usefulangle.com/web-updates/post/80/firefox-decines-... It really struck a bad chord for me. Rather than update your permissions model or consider how best to implement, being a browser that simply won't do WebUSB or WebMIDI or h…
I don't get the objection either: Unlike for e.g. notification access (which is frequently abused and which Firefox does implement!), I can't imagine websites demanding USB access in exchange for, I don't know – discount codes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While that's useful, it also seems a bit like "For the next month, relatives will be visiting so my spouse won't be able to beat me." When there's no good reason to believe the other party will actually change their ultimate goals, it's better to cut your losses and switch sooner.
I’ve gotta imagine that you could’ve found an analogy that didn’t compare domestic abuse with some nerd not being able to use their favourite browser extension.
If it were that easy, I think you'd have shared it immediately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While that's useful, it also seems a bit like "For the next month, relatives will be visiting so my spouse won't be able to beat me." When there's no good reason to believe the other party will actually change their ultimate goals, it's better to cut your losses and switch sooner.
I’ve gotta imagine that you could’ve found an analogy that didn’t compare domestic abuse with some nerd not being able to use their favourite browser extension.
I wouldn't even say that it is obvious Spyware-aaS is a lesser problem in society than domestic abuse (even though the individual victim is far worse off, of course), due to ruined social cohesion etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the news broke again of this change, I made yet another attempt to return to Firefox. Fortunately, I never returned. They’ve improved quite a bit in terms of resource usage and functionality, and I’m not looking back.
So you returned to Firefox and stayed? I.e. did not return back to Chrome?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The vast majority of people working on Firefox are employees of the Mozilla Corporation which is a for profit subsidiary of the Foundation. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/organizations...
the foundation owns the corporation and can dissolve it if it turns evil. There's no similar public-good outfit that can dissolve Google.
I'm also afraid how this usually turns out is the for-profit part takes over the non-profit part. See OpenAI or just about any major national non-profit in the US.
Will brave continue to support manifest v2? Also seems like we can maybe expect a ublock browser in the future.
I use Firefox and have never understood why so many people use a browser made by a for profit company
After that it's just inertia, it's the head of the pack because it's the head of the pack and people already use it.
To convince people to change generally you can't just offer the same or similar performance and features, it has to be a worthwhile reward for the user to bother. This change which just might be crippling enough for adblockers may be enough to get people to switch.