Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

Post by Kwpolska » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 3:37 PM UTC

omnimus wrote: post #602

Kwpolska wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever used Linux with high DPI monitors? Windows handles them OK since Windows Vista, and really well since 8. I've seen the classic Windows XP bug of measurements not being scaled and labels being cut off on modern Linux. How about mixed DPI multi monitor setups? Great since Windows 10. On Linux, you're screwed. X doesn't support this. Wayland does, but not all apps work well with that, and not all apps and…

This is a bit outdated i run mixed multi monitor setup and for last year or two it has been working no issues. Linux moves slowly but steadily and things eventualy get pretty great (another example sound and pipewire). I think people make mistake of trying Ubuntu LTS thats super conservative with updates so you are years behind. For desktop you really want Fedora or something even more up to date. I think people soul…

Post by JimDabell » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 3:38 PM UTC

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #717

JimDabell wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true yet, but it’s getting close. The pattern is this: - Google publishes a specification. - They raise request for feedback from the Mozilla and WebKit teams. - Mozilla and WebKit find security and privacy problems. - Google deploys their implementation anyway. - This functionality gets listed on sites like whatpwacando.today - Web developers complain about Safari being behind and accuse Apple of holding…

> Mozilla and WebKit find security and privacy problems This is a little disingenuous because Apple often falsely claims security when it’s to hold back tech that could loosen the App Store grasp.

Post by p_j_w » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 3:48 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #572

al_borland wrote: post #66

Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.

We need webmasters to nudge people away from Chrome. E.g. show an annoying popup on opening the page or add a small delay.

Post by hdjrudni » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 3:50 PM UTC

jmb99 wrote: post #365

8n4vidtmkvmk wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse me. If it's on MDN, I'm going to use it if it's useful for my app. Not my fault if not all browsers can keep up! Half JK. If I get user complaints I'll patch them for other browsers but I'm only one person so it's hard and I rely on user feedback. (Submit bug reports y'all)

Why not only use features that are compatible with all browsers? You don’t need to use every bleeding edge feature to make a website.

Post by mckravchyk » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 4:01 PM UTC

amluto wrote: post #556

Neywiny wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be shocked if anyone actually believes them. This article starts with the obvious conflict of interest. Of course letting an extension know what websites you visit and what requests are made is an insecure lifestyle. But I still do it because I trust uBO more than I trust the ad companies and their data harvesters.

No, MV3 really isn’t more secure. MV3 still allows extensions to inspect your requests — it just doesn’t allow extensions to block them. It’s almost comical how weak the security/privacy argument for MV3 is. Chrome could have developed a sandboxed web request inspection framework to prevent data exfiltration, but they didn’t even try. Instead they nerfed ad blockers without adding any security.