50
Tech news doesn't understand ad blockers or Chrome extensions
(www.spacebar.news)
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Yes. Thank you. This article is apologia for Google, and very unhelpful. There is a reason anyone interested in controlling their own browser is unhappy with this arbitrary limit.
Google's argument is that letting ad blocking extensions filter each and every web request, puts your browser under the control of the extension developers.
And... they aren't wrong. This discussion boils down to: who do you want to control your browser, Google, or the extension developers?
Anyone interested in actually controlling their own browser, would compile it from source and create their own ad blocking extension. But that's not happening for the vast majority, so it's a choice in whom you trust.
(PS: I'd sooner trust Mozilla... maybe)
I'd argue that part of controlling your own browser is being able to make that decision. Manifest v3 will rob you of that ability.
Firefox is adding Manifest v3... without deprecating the blocking API call that ad blockers use, so no, Mv3 doesn't rob you of anything... if you were in control of your browser in the first place.
Erm, that makes all the difference. We're talking about Google robbing you of choice. Which they are doing by replacing v2 with v3.
Of course Firefox is not doing that.