Google Confirms They Will Disable uBlock Origin in Chrome Mid 2024
(www.reddit.com)
Comments (54)
sorted by:
Hopefully, the chrome spinoff browsers like Brave will be able to get around this. But better yet, I really hope it'll force people to have to use something other than Chrome. There's honestly no good browser out there from a "divest from the system" perspective. It's all FF and Chrome based which are both ultimately Google and leftist degen.
They won't. Slimjet (another Chrome variant) tried it a few years ago with some other cancerous change (forget which) and they could only keep it up for a short while before managing the desynchronised codebase became too burdensome. Retaining MV2 would be even worse.
That's what I figured. That means soon all browsers are going to become useless.
Nah, it's not that bad, yet.
a) Manifest v2 shutdown has been promised for years now Sure, it will come but Google has pushed it back several times already (though I'm sure it will come eventually)
b) Manifest v3 does hurt, yes. But you've got options of uBlock origin light, adguard, ghostery, and probably others to choose from for adblocking. Plus, unless the Brave browser shuts down entirely I'm sure they'll keep working on their shields and adblocking as much as possible.
c) There are browser alternatives. While Mozilla is pozzed, there are several good Firefox forks - Waterfox, Librewolf, Pale Moon, probably more. (Heck, not even sure I'd call Pale Moon a fork anymore as it has been 6-7 years since it was mostly different). And, though I am loathe for many reasons to give Apple anything, Safari is still it's own thing, not Chromium (though I've no idea of the extension availability on it).
d) People are indeed making their own browsers from scratch. Two I know of are Flow and Ladybird though again, no idea of the adblock functionality they will have.
e) PiHoles and similar exist, and while they do not stop things like in-line Youtube ads they do stop a lot of the most obnoxious ones.
f) If all else fails, we can all just go back to Lynx like it's 1993.
And probably more stuff. Will things change some, yes. But life finds a way.
It's no more pozzed than Google. Pozzed and allowing ad blockers is still better than pozzed and not allowing ad blockers. Hopefully something better will become available but I wouldn't fault anyone for switching to Firefox if ad blocking becomes impossible on all Chromium based browsers.
My dad has dementia, but wont give up his laptop. uBlock keeps him from clicking literally every scam on the internet. My life will become a nightmare of tech support.
Someone should honestly sue google after being scammed for stopping uBlock Origin from working.
I honestly wouldn't be opposed to the government making advertisements 100% optional IN ALL THINGS. People should be able to choose to opt-in and opt-out of all advertisements. That should be a damn amendment to the constitution.
Our governments will make a law that says you can't block ads.
Sounds about right.
They'll spend millions policing every second of every youtube video for someone saying anything naughty about the beer virus, but heaven forbid they ever even manually review a single ad they put up.
I'm sure it's something you've already investigated but a thin client or pi with PiHole still pretty effectively nukes all ads without ublock.
Wait - are you suggesting his dad connects through a raspberry pi to filter out ads?
Not exactly. You put a device on your network that you let handle DNS and it black holes everything that matches the blocklists
Does it help with the random pop up crap they add to their site, like the one encouraging people to sign in? Most of my custom filters in UBO are things I've added over the years to keep YouTube usable.
Thanks. I'll see what I can learn about that.
Besides the other suggestions, a premium Malwarebytes license might also be helpful.
Google abusing their search monopoly to canibalize other industries?
It’s literally why we have the sherman antitrust monopoly laws.
Republicans need to start fighting back.
Wonder if they could then block all none chrome browsers from using youtube, probably wouldnt be legal in the EU at least. But they could make the loading slower.
Sorry to repeat my other comment.
But this is literally why we have the sherman antitrust laws.
To stop google using its monopoly in search to capture an industry like the browser market.
What is lacking is republican desire to prosecute this goliath.
I think even in the USA that would probably be a no go.
alredy have been pushes for simalar more broad reaching tech. look up Web Environment Integrity and how it could be abused to basicly apple web store the net. JodyBruchon did a vid on it some time ago.
As long as the browser is technically capable of rendering the website changing your user agent gets around that.
How convenient that they're doing it in the middle of a major election season. Gotta make sure everyone can see all their one-sided political ads all the time.
All the retards in the comments recommending Firefox, which is effectively a Google owned and managed browser.
Exactly right. 70% of Mozilla’s revenue comes from google, since google is the default search engine with Mozilla, they get a kickback from Alphabet. This is a fascinating report on where Mozilla gets its funding, and what it does with the money. https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4387539/firefox-money-investigating-the-bizarre-finances-of-mozilla
Im on firefox. I have 8500 tabs. 1/3 hentai, 1/3 porn, 1/3 mods for games lol.
Anti-trust breakup, when?
Shame the GOP are just yippy little purse dogs hanging off the arm of the Democrats won't do anything.
We need a real opposition party.
Glad I don't use chrome, google, gmail or any of their shit products.
Sounds like it's an extension API thing, where addons on Manifest V2 won't be supported for much longer. So this is less of a case of targeting uBlock so much as the usual run of older addon-death.
Not that I'm a fan of that shit at all due to the sheer inconvenience, but it's more of a technical and backwards compatibility problem than a Google-agenda kind of problem.
Granted, it's possible Google could make it less of a hassle with regards to the backwards compatibility and/or make it easier for addon developers to convert over to the newer API, but I'm not familiar enough with the specifics to be sure.
Considering Youtube's latest behavior I'm almost certain this is intentional.
They've been trying to block adblockers, disabled the ability of youtubers to chose how ads are displayed, increased premium subscription prices, etc. They are pushing hard to make money.
Money now, gonna get way worse very soon.
Wait until you have to verify your computer's entire stack through your browser. The browser will have to be signed, your OS will enforce that signature, all tied nicely in a bow with your computer's Trusted Platform Module.
Any link in the chain that looks a little off (aka. too freedom-y) will get denied as fast as you press enter on your address bar.
"But I'm going to run some privacy-focused fork!"
Nope, Billy, but that won't happen. Your bank, your school, your work, your social media: once these features are available, they'll just stop accepting traffic from unsigned browsers, and they won't hand out certificates unless you hold water for what they care about. "Sorry, you have to use a supported browser on a supported OS on a supported hardware system to use this site."
why do i get reminded of the browser wars and how some sites could only be read in certain ones?
They forced
HTTP3HTTP 2 on the industry just to track people more. A whole foundational protocol just to track you. Of course they would purposely torpedo ad blockers and pretend it was an accident.One of the little unnoticed differences in
HTTP3HTTP 2 (aka SPDY) is now there is one connection to google-analytics that's now shared across all domains and it stays open for an hour instead of 4 minutes.Google's Doubleclick swears that they would never (how dare you suggest it) track you based on that TCP connection. Riiight. How convenient that HTTP2 is more complicated yet no faster and just happens to give Google a new session super-cookie.
edit: late comment, I got my versions off by one ^_^
I wouldn't be shocked though if what allows uBlock Origin to work is not allowed in the new V3. Typically, companies do this sort of thing so they wouldn't be able to offer backwards compatibility specifically because they don't want add-ons to function with V2 functionality which is why they developed V3 in the first place among other reasons.
Ah, I think you're mostly right. Was just reminded that MV3 might be part of that big wave of general ad-blocker prevention stuff that we've been warned about for the last year or two.
Mv3 removes the ability to filter network requests. It disables as blockers.
Thanks for the clarification. I only did a cursory glance into it, been juggling a few things today on only 3 hours of sleep.
it's not broken and does not need to be "fixed"
No, it's a removing functionality to intentionally cripple adblockers problem.
What is a decent browser to use these days? I haven't got much of a clue when it comes to confusers these days so I've just been using brave. But if this is what Google and I guess by extention Chrome is going to take then I'm going to need a new browser.
That's just it. There are none.
Link the relevant shit, not reddit:
https://archive.is/3wN0t
https://archive.is/ucrSF