this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
1146 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

58712 readers
3986 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Clearly, Google is serious about trying to oust ad blockers from its browser, or at least those extensions with fuller (V2) levels of functionality. One of the crucial twists with V3 is that it prevents the use of remotely hosted code – as a security measure – but this also means ad blockers can’t update their filter lists without going through Google’s review process. What does that mean? Way slower updates for said filters, which hampers the ability of the ad-blocking extension to keep up with the necessary changes to stay effective.

(This isn’t just about browsers, either, as the war on advert dodgers extends to YouTube, too, as we’ve seen in recent months).

At any rate, Google is playing with fire here somewhat – or Firefox, perhaps we should say – as this may be the shove some folks need to get them considering another of the best web browsers out there aside from Chrome. Mozilla, the maker of Firefox, has vowed to maintain support for V2 extensions, while introducing support for V3 alongside to give folks a choice (now there’s a radical idea).

(page 5) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Firefox isn't far behind now. They just announced ads are coming and they know their platform is used heavily with ad blocking extensions so they'll cut it

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 71 points 1 week ago (16 children)

I don't understand seemingly intelligent people who still blindly use chrome at this point...

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I kinda have to at work. Our classroom computers reset between classes and Chrome is the only browser installed. I might ask IT about that, moving forward, given uBlock getting neutered soon.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

suddenly 20 new chromium forks appear

Huh, where'd those come from, I wonder. 🤔

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 week ago (1 children)

When is this happening? I've been telling my wife and kid that they need to stop using chrome for a year, but ublock is still working for them and blocking YouTube ads. They are the type that won't switch until it becomes a problem for them.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

I think that's the point: Google has been shutting down Manifest V2 extensions one step at a time, and it's been experimenting with anti-ad-block tech on YouTube with one user group at a time.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 week ago

I heard that google is sending fake focus groups invites to males around your area. Yeah, it's true! Someone gullible enough to drive to their facility and sit in their special google chairs. Once they sit, the chair 💺 traps them and a small machine arm approaches in between their legs, injects local anesthesia and procedes to remove the genitalia. It was a really well done Fox News report that I heard on MPR. It's supposed to be part of alphabet's war on cancer. They will eventually have the robots smart enough to remove only cancer cells. But yeah, for now it's removing the whole thing. So be on the lookout for that. And ads! I hate the ads!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Browsers with in built adblocker or system wide AdGuard.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

Or Firefox?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Those are trash and DNS adblocking does not work on YT either. Garbage advice 0/10

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

No, you're wrong.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

DNS ad blockers are not sufficient to block all ads and often overly broad. So they have much higher rate of false positives and negatives compared to in-browser ad blockers. Differentiating between ads and useful content based on domain names will become more and more difficult. Both might use some url from the same cloud provider, and blocking those breaks a lot of stuff.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (4 children)

AdGuard is not a DNS blocker

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

porque no los dos? I use both and there are things uBlock can catch/block that AdGuard Home doesn't seem to be able to. That said AdGuard makes mobile pages readable, when most these days are a complete nightmare of ads

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I was talking about AdGuard, not AdGuard Home.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I misread system wide as network wide. My mistake. FWIW, I still prefer a network wide and browser plugin (ublock and privacy badger) combo.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

~laughs in firefox~

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

I just installed Postmarket OS on my Arm based Chromebook, to be able to switch to Firefox.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Right? I don't think anyone using Chrome with adblockers is just gonna be like "oh well, guess we got ads now"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›