Live data from Hacker News

Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

9to5google.com

531–540 of 909 posts

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it doesn't work in Firefox I don't use it. I've been using Firefox for as long as I can remember, probably shortly after it was made and Netscape died. And would never use Chrome. Chrome users are now going to be betrayed and just didn't see it coming. I look forward to Firefox' upcoming rebound which I have every faith this news will spur on.

But doesn't Firefox require that godawful add-on signing?

Waterfox does not

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#532
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink. Electron, various browsers that are just skins over the embedded framework... We were still dealing with legacy IE6 (and IE 7/8 by that point also) in 2013! Almost a decade since we got Firefox and the first version of Chrome. The web has empirically suffered through homogeneity and the lack of strong competitors in t…

> This is why it’s so unfortunate and frustrating that people are depending so much on Chromium/Blink Chromium is generally fine, until Google packages it as Chrome. The issues are not inherent to Chromium, they're failures of principle at Google. I know people like the idea, in concept, of engine diversity on the web, but the alternatives are terrible. Anyone who says that Firefox runs anywhere near as well as Chrom…

I run firefox on linux on two computers. Works great, no tweaking/building required.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#533
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Standards often shift be a substantial reconsolidation, in which numerous side features are discarded. HTML itself emerged from such a consolidation (from SGML) and went through this process a few times. There are numerous other examples of technical recapitulation.

HTML and the menagerie of related standards has never, as far as I'm aware, become simpler. And the old versions have never been removed from a browser.

XHTML was a step too far. It was rejected in favour of HTML4 & 5, ultimately.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many tabs do you consider to be too many tabs? Most of the time I open up to 10 tabs, and Firefox is performing fine. But I have also seen people opening 40 tabs.

At home I have like 60+ tabs open. And at work I have > 100. Firefox is pretty rock solid now with many tabs on windows. Chrome can’t cope with that. Or it couldn’t a year ago when I switched to Firefox. The tabs are mostly blogs and things I’m slowly reading or such. I just open more than I close :(

Interesting. Pretty sure __I__ would crash with that many tabs open.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#535
This makes sense from the viewpoint that google is entirely beholden to their shareholders and has to maintain their insane growth. That doesn't make it ok.

It's a shame all these companies follow such a predictable pattern. Any resources to help actively ungoogle? I've switched search, email, and browser so far, and will be pushing everyone I know to avoid. Long time coming.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#536

Slightly off topic, I'm finding it very disingenuous that people in this thread(and any other threads that come up about Firefox) have actually had significant performance issues with Firefox. No bugs that are noteworthy, sans that fiasco with the expired certificate that disabled addons briefly. I've been using Firefox since "quantum" on both my MacBooks(one of which is old AF) and on Linux. I've yet to have problem…

Linux is a third-class citizen for Firefox and its very obvious. Not only is the rendering performance and responsiveness subpar compared to Chromium, but even very basic things like XDG spec support have still not been implemented after sitting on bugzilla for more than a decade.

To me, its incredibly ironic. On one hand, it makes sense for Firefox to focus on Windows because that's where most of its users are. On the other hand, what's the point of using Firefox in such a privacy-hostile OS filled with ads, telemetry, and tracking?

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#537

I'm confused about the difference between what people are saying here, and what chromium is working on. Referring to the email discussion of the feature: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/chromium-exte... " It's really unfortunate how many people seem to be commenting here without understanding what the proposed changes even are. To be clear: 1. This change _IS NOT INTENDED TO GIMP AD BLOCKERS_. Rather,…

Don't yell. 1. Explain a specific use case that the new API can't handle (including a technical explanation of _why_ it can't handle that use-case) The maximum number of rules is 30k, which will break HTTPSEverywhere (I'm assuming you don't need that explained). Suggest constructive changes to manifest V3's API that will improve its capabilities _while still adhering to the stated goals of manifest V3_ If Google want…

FYI I'm quoting the email list, that might not have been clear.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#538
post #440

Slightly off topic, I'm finding it very disingenuous that people in this thread(and any other threads that come up about Firefox) have actually had significant performance issues with Firefox. No bugs that are noteworthy, sans that fiasco with the expired certificate that disabled addons briefly. I've been using Firefox since "quantum" on both my MacBooks(one of which is old AF) and on Linux. I've yet to have problem…

Firefox has significant performance and correctness problems. * Multi-second UI jank/freeze ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1546847 ) * HTTP2 is broken, infinite-stalls and internal errors surface if you upload enough files ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1540574 ) * WebGL is very slow on Linux ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1010527 ) * High CPU on Linux even when in the…

Firefox also has bad input lag compared to chrome, everywhere from the address bar to basic textareas.

I've filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1408699 quite a while ago with some measurements. Sadly, no progress so far.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kinda erases history. IE was riddled with security flaws and stagnant beyond belief when Firefox usurped it. There was a compelling reason to use an IE alternative back then - they actually offered something IE couldn't give. Chrome doesn't have that problem.

Mozilla can (and does) offer putting the privacy concerns and an open web first. Google has worked very hard over the years to make itself into an organization with deeply baked-in incentives to do the opposite. It'd take a decade of sustained effort working counter to powerful incentives to fix that. This is distinct from making a capable well-performing browser, which Google has done. So has Mozilla.

Yeah, sure, privacy is good.

It's not a product-making sale point for the vast majority of people.

Re: Google to restrict modern ad blocking Chrome extensions to enterprise users

#540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Why-don't-you-accept-... Here is the official explanation of why donations are not accepted.

>I want to be free to move onto something else if ever I get tired working on these projects (no donations = no expectations). Well this is exactly why we wanted to hive him money. Hopefully if he gets bored someone else will carry the torch.

Last time that happened uBlock was captured by the enemy.
Post reply on HN