Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

malwarebytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 250 posts

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#91

Post by wslh »

whycome wrote: post #27
wslh wrote: post #23

In a few years: LLM: Hi! Me: Please develop a browser that is full HTML, etc, etc compliant LLM: No problem... download the source here. Me: Thank you, but could you please optimize it for speed? LLM: No problem, done. Me: I have only 5 more minutes, could you please write a version in Rust, and two more in Go and C++? Ah, and support Linux, MacOS, Windows, Android and iOS. Don't forget to use the native WebView in i…

But also LLM: Unfortunately, as a subsidiary of MSFT, I cannot allow you to create a competitor to Edge. Would you like to try Edge now instead?

Hopefully soon, we would be able to run this models locally/on-premise. Don't you think so?

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#92

Post by P-Nuts »

otikik wrote: post #86
mrastro wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Firefox/Chrome duopoly"? You're forgetting Safari; they have larger market share than Firefox.

Firefox works very well on iPhone, by the way. It’s my daily browser there.

It doesn’t support extensions though. I think only Orion supports extensions on iPhone.

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#93

Post by eigenvalue »

I thought Brave made very little sense when it was first launched. Who would want an ersatz Chrome browser? Now it's starting to look very smart. Sure, it's open source so anyone can fork Chromium. But it does take a lot of sophistication to do it properly and add back the usability bits in a nice way. And if you could basically have Chrome but without losing the ad blocking, that starts to sound pretty compelling.

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#94

Post by StableAlkyne »

fbdab103 wrote: post #64
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #3

Most of the Internet is almost unusable without ad blockers. I suspect this will be good for Firefox.

It is truly unbelievable how bad it has become. Even informational articles might only have a paragraph of text between ads. Plus, the frequent animations/pop-unders/whatever. Everyone can decry the loss of the "small web" as much as they want, but the cram-ads-into-every-pixel dystopia means why should anyone bother? Even big brands are not immune to this behavior. At least if someone stays on the Instagram/Reddit/T…

> Even informational articles might only have a paragraph of text between ads.

The thing that made me realize how bad it's gotten was ironically an inability to use ad blockers. At one job, we weren't allowed to install any adblockers to the browser (there was a lot of bureaucracy so I never figured out why). Ended up writing my own JS bookmarklets to remove ad elements from sites I commonly visited. Also started browsing the web more in the terminal with Lynx because there are no images, it's just text. No distractions.

Taking your typical "How do you frob a xyzzy in the foo framework?" Medium article, the entire thing would usually fit on my screen in the terminal. The GUI browser had one or two lines followed by an image of ad.

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#95

Post by sharps1 »

derefr wrote: post #15

Two questions I haven't seen addressed by any coverage of this change: 1. Will the ultimate removal of Manifest V2 support affect other Chromium-based browsers, or only Chrome itself? If the support for Manifest V2 isn't removed upstream in Chromium, but only disabled in Chrome, then I would expect that we will end up in a world where other browsers (e.g. Edge, Brave, Opera) continue to allow the installation of Mani…

Edge is following chromes lead.

Vivaldi and Brave are going to maintain the code so at least uBlock Origin can work. Nobody knows how this will play out as the forks won’t want to stray faraway from the chromium code as that would add a lot of overhead.

I tried a bunch of the forks, didn’t like Vivaldi, don’t like some of Braves crap, and won’t use the Chinese browser Opera.

Ended up moving our family back to Firefox.

I miss chromium’s better profile management and the app as a window. Rest of the family don’t miss any of those. Other than that happy with Firefox.

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#97

Post by [deleted] »

eigenvalue wrote: post #93

I thought Brave made very little sense when it was first launched. Who would want an ersatz Chrome browser? Now it's starting to look very smart. Sure, it's open source so anyone can fork Chromium. But it does take a lot of sophistication to do it properly and add back the usability bits in a nice way. And if you could basically have Chrome but without losing the ad blocking, that starts to sound pretty compelling.

[deleted]

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#98

Post by WirelessGigabit »

layer8 wrote: post #22
derefr wrote: post #15

Two questions I haven't seen addressed by any coverage of this change: 1. Will the ultimate removal of Manifest V2 support affect other Chromium-based browsers, or only Chrome itself? If the support for Manifest V2 isn't removed upstream in Chromium, but only disabled in Chrome, then I would expect that we will end up in a world where other browsers (e.g. Edge, Brave, Opera) continue to allow the installation of Mani…

One reason Google wants to remove V2 support is to make implementation changes that V2 currently prevents. This means that a Chromium fork that preserves V2 support will likely have to diverge further and further from Chromium over time (or rather, Chromium will diverge).

I did some searching but I couldn't find information about this. Can you share where you read it?

Re: Chrome pushes forward with plans to limit ad blockers in the future

#100

Post by belltaco »

stainablesteel wrote: post #45

in wake of the EU ruling that youtube isn't allowed to block adblockers, i can understand this move. imo the eu needs to stay out of this. its a competition between people trying to block ads and trying to force you to see them, which i see nothing wrong with.

> EU ruling that youtube isn't allowed to block adblockers

When did that happen? Link?

Post reply on HN