• scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I take this as a sign that it genuinely still works to block ads and hasn’t sold out and become malware like those others that used to be popular.

  • Nanook@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    185
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Google is not an IT company. It’s an advertising company. Surprised Pikachu, it blocks ad blockers.

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Because they are at the end of their growth phase and have entered their squeeze until dead phase.

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yes, but enshittification doesn’t happen all at once. And this is a textbook example of the actual meaning of enshittification.

      • Nanook@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Yeah it’s always been an ad company. And you are correct, blocking apps is new, welcome to the last stage in the ad-blocking arms race. Glad I degoogled my digital life a decade ago.

        • JimBarbecue@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Hey, can you tell a little bit about your stack, what apps and services do you use? Also on phone? I guess in a decade you could work that out pretty well.

        • takeda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah. What company wouldn’t allow it?

          When I was working for an ad exchange, everyone had adblock installed in their browsers, I found that quite ironic.

          • shyguyblue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            I used to develop ads (non intrusive things for home depot or go RVing) and i used ad blockers. When testing, i would just run private browsing with plugins disabled…

        • Dave@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          2 days ago

          Officially only Edge is supported, but Chrome is tolerated. It’s a full MS environment.

          • reev@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Same here. The worst thing is in their justification of disallowing Firefox they listed that it was not an enterprise application. I get that it might be extra effort to support it but don’t list something factually untrue as a lame cop out for why you don’t want to.

            • NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              24
              ·
              2 days ago

              Was told it wouldn’t be allowed because you couldn’t restrict it using GPO… Until I told them they could absolutely apply those restrictions using GPO and even provided the ADMX templates.

          • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 days ago

            Click on every single ad and banner, click “I agree” on every pop-up. Make that computer hate it’s life!

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          2 days ago

          At large organizations you’re generally not allowed to download much of anything without it passing through IT security and management first. If it’s a no, it will probably stay a no.

          • Flagstaff@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I work for a non-profit and they are way more lenient about what we would like to install as long as the job gets done.

          • datavoid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Just remember,it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than permission!

            • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              Just to be clear, I mean it’s literally managed at the Group Policy level (in Windows server environments at least) and no amount of asking will suddenly give your user account permissions to be able to save files of any kind.

              You generally literally cannot download it without going through IT to get them to approve of and give your account access first.

              • datavoid@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Ya I forgot I have escalated device privileges and an admin account, which I definitely would have used for installing anything. Although I believe I can also skirt the rules using winget on a user account. That will probably get you in trouble however!

      • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        If you had uBlock origin already, you may have gotten a message through Chrome that it was no longer supported, so it’s been disabled, and gives you the option to remove it. However, I noticed you don’t have to remove it, and it can be re-enabled. However, I need someone smarter with adblockers than I to say if this is actually helpful and not hazardous.

        • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          People are saying manifest v2 (the old API that ublock uses) will be gone soon, which I think should effectively make ublock unusable whatever you do unless you stop updating chrome maybe (which could open you up to a ton of security issues) ? Not sure, don’t care since I’ve ditched chrome long ago

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I just downloaded the Kagi Orion browser and I can install extensions from both Chrome and Firefox web stores!

    • FundMECFS@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Is there any firefox based browser on android where I can have easy gestures for the arrow buttons? All the firefox versions I can find require me to do this in two clicks which for the way I browse is a pain in the arse. Can I fix this somehow?

    • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I only use chrome for my work stuff, and that’s because I work with g-suite a lot.

      Chrome fucking sucks

    • ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Missing critical features:

      Filter lists only update with the extension, you cannot update them dynamically

      No making your own filters and thus no element picker for blocking annoyances on a webpage (a feature so good apple literally baked it into safari)

      No support for external lists (which means if you back up your own filters into a list you cannot easily reimport)

      No changing behavior on a per site basis

      A number of other features as well that are more strictly power user features but still really handy like dynamic filtering and strict blocking domains.

      If you have the option stop using chrome and edge, they are some of the worst options you could choose. Even outside of adblock and manifest v3 chrome is horrendous for data harvesting bullshit and edge isn’t great. If you don’t have the option because of an overzealous it dept or whatever and are forced to use it ubo lite is your best option probably and my heart goes out to you

      • Pamasich@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m a bit confused as an Adblock Plus user, why did the ublock dev drop those features? ABP uses manifest v3 too and it still has all of those. So it’s clearly not about them being impossible.

        • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          According to Adblock Plus’ own blog post about the matter:

          With Manifest V3, Adblock Plus is required to limit how many filter lists we have available to users. We’ll have the ability to offer up to 100 pre-installed filter lists that you can turn on and off depending on your preferences. From these available filter lists, users will be able to choose 50 that they can keep turned on at any given time. We’re working to ensure that popular filter lists our users love are supported by us, and that any updates to these lists are brought to you by frequent new releases of the extension. This does mean that initially, our users will no longer be able to subscribe to any filter lists outside of what is provided in the extension.

          Re: Element Blocker:

          The Block element feature will continue to exist even after the Manifest V3 version of Adblock Plus officially launches. Manifest V3 does require us to adhere to limits with filter lists and user created blocking rules, so there’s a chance things may change in the future. However, we don’t have details quite yet! If you have any more questions about this or anything else, our support team are the best people to ask at support@adblockplus.org.

          So this says to me that baked in filter lists are now required, custom lists will not work, and Block Element is probably functioning illegally if it is indeed still functioning though that may change in the future in either direction.

          Changing blocker behavior on specific sites is the only thing in that list that I see UBO disallow and ABP not mention at all. Not sure why that was changed.

          • Pamasich@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Probably because of the Adblock Plus mention. It’s mired in controversy because of its acceptable ads toggle and requiring ad giants to pay for it. So I can imagine people downvoting comments that put it in a positive light compared to other adblockers.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      It is 100000% a reason to split Chrome and the ad sales part of Google into different companies.

      It won’t solve the problem but the pressures end up being orders of magnitude different.

  • Libra00@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yeah, I heard someone say a week or so ago that they straight disabled it in the browser, and now only the gimped version that works with Manifest V3 works now. Thankfully I switched to Firefox when all this Manifest V3 stuff was announced. As far as I know it’s the only browser out there that isn’t based on Chromium (which Google also controls, so browsers like Brave will likely be affected by this soon as well, unless a bunch of those smaller browsers get together and fork Chromium and maintain it themselves, which I’m not very hopeful about) and so doesn’t have to worry about these shenanigans.

    • raptir@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Brave and Vivaldi are chromium based but have adblocking built in rather than relying on an extension. So while they will eventually be impacted on extension support, the built in adblocking (which is quite robust) won’t be affected.

      • Libra00@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I used Brave for a while and found I still needed to use ublock to cover some things, especially stuff like Youtube ads.

      • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        But then you’re indirectly giving the enemy (Google) power by increasing their browser market share, which in turn lets them dictate the future of the web.

  • Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    There’s a way to save your already-installed extension, in “Manage Extensions…” Enable dev mode, then Pack Extension.

    However the browser will probably just refuse to run it soon.

    Vivaldi, for what it’s worth, seems to still run uBlock Origin just fine. I am afraid to uninstall it now to test if it’ll re-install properly.

    My version: 7.1.3570.39 (Stable channel) (64-bit)

    Might be time to finally move to Firefox though, if Vivaldi doesn’t keep Manifest V2 support.

      • Vespair@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I wish Vivaldi wasn’t Chromium-based, because I think it’s the slickest browser out there.

        But it’s chromium, so it’s time to move on to Firefox regardless.

        Ladybird development can’t happen fast enough.

        • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          By that argument the time was a long time ago then. Vivaldi still works with uBlock so nothing has changed on their end. I think it’s still reasonable to use Vivaldi until they are forced to Manifest 3. Despite being Chromium based they’ve always been privacy focused and vocally pro ad blocking. As far as the cult of Firefox, they’ve been showing their true colors lately. They are no saints and their biggest funder is Google. Never forget to follow the money. I’m not personally convinced that a switch on a purely ideological level is indicated.

  • Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 days ago

    I really hope some team has been following the changes in Chrome/Chromium by Google to remove Manifest v2, and has been keeping a patchset that will undo the damage? Time to make a hard fork and get some funding to try to keep it going?

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 days ago

      Multiple browsers have said they will keep support while the code is still there (in Chromium it’s still there, only disabled for now).

      When it is removed from Chromium, it’s probably going to disappear for most or all major Chromium browsers.

      • Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Well I would seriously consider paying money to a team that keeps it there, if Chromium actually removes the code. I hope others will consider it as well. We need to fight this, even if it means paying some money to a foundation to do so.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      i expect at least the ‘big’ ‘non megacorp’ chromium based ones like vivaldi, opera, brave to keep mv2 as long as it is possible.

      but i can totally see google doing some serious mangling of the codebase to make patching-in mv2 difficult.

      • Arghblarg@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        There’s the futile hope I suppose that antitrust cases going on against Alphabet might force Google to divest Chrome from its advertising arm, so that there’s no pressure to make this whole thing worse. Hah, in my dreams.

        • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          On paper they gave the keys to the Linux foundation, but since they still pay most of the developers working on it the only thing it might achieve is taking resources away from Servo.

        • adarza@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          that would be funny, won’t happen–but funny af. google loses chrome, new owners revert mv2’s removal and go all-in on user control of their browser experience.