What I'm scared is publishers taking this as a reason to simply start banning Firefox and other browsers.
this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
58692 readers
3970 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There's already plenty of business web apps that require chrome. I specifically use a business focused web app that not only requires Chrome, but ONLY CHROME ITSELF and no chromium derivatives. That's the first time I've come across that. I had previously seen chrome requirements, but they worked just fine on ungoogled chromium. Not this one, nope. Regular Google Chrome and nothing else. wtf is that garbage.
You can get past these with a user agent, lying about which browser it is. However, they aren't testing for other browsers, so their site maybe as buggy as hell. As yet Firefox doesn't do a WINE and match Chrome, bug for bug, so sites work as intended. Google have cause IE6's return.
An ecom site decides to block 5% of web traffic and potential sales?
Now tell the marketing team you are turning away 1 in 20 potential customers because (well, not really sure why) and see what they have to say.
Let this be my warning to Google that I will never go back to their browser when they do. Challas! ✌️
load more comments
(2 replies)
I honestly can't wait to see how this plays out. Only Chrome, chromium and edge in their pure forms have dedicated to doing this. Most of the Chrome forks have said they're going to fork and keep it running. It's certainly going to give Firefox a shot in the arm, but there's no lack of other competition either.
I don't know how long the forks will be able to backport new features to their forked codebase.
I think the only sensible solution is to just switch to Firefox.
Eventually Firefox will switch to V3 anyway so it's kind of just delaying the inevitable.
It sucks that this is the future of the Internet.
Manifest v3 is already supported in Firefox (they must support it to keep the extension ecosystem alive), but they implemented it without the user-hostile restrictions.
Oh, I wasn't aware of that, I thought the user-hostile restrictions were inherent to Manifest v3 and they were unavoidable.
Okay, maybe just maybe Firefox squeaks by unharmed then.
edit: I literally just had someone else tell me just now that "It’s not something that can be worked around. It’s specifically a design feature of manifest v3 to restrict these types of things."
So which is it? I'm kind of getting mixed signals here.
edit 2: Oh, it sounds like Google has additional arbitrary restrictions on content blocking functionality, beyond what Manifest V3 itself has.
It’s probably 95% of windows users then who are affected by this.
Especially those at work who can't install their own software.
Oh yeah easily.
Glad I've finally migrated to firefox...
Glad I have firefox as well but also looking forward to a cool new project called Ladybird. https://ladybird.org
Not sure if its the right one but glad there are more projects out there trying to jump into the game. (I know extensions are a long way off for it but i see it as hope.)
Also please consider running pihole or adguard home. Or any other full home DNS add blocker. It will help.
Looks like what I'd want to use, but to reach broad support it needs a Windows client as well.
Ladybird looks great! Very much looking forward to an alpha linux release so I can use it and give all kind of feedback.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm warning Google that Google Chrome may soon be disabled on my devices.
I rlly hate how some sites don't work on Firefox
Which sites?
Snapchat
And nothing of value was lost.
I need it for one of my irl friends
User agent switcher. I have zero issues since using it.
I'm showing my age, but back when IE was basically the only browser and Firefox (Firebird back then) launched, people often lamented that things didn't work in Firefox. The solution? People used Firefox and web developers were forced to make their shit work in Firefox. When Chrome came out, suddenly we had three real options and the way to make everything work? Open Standards.
Now, Chrome is in the position IE was back before Firefox came around. How ever will we make sure things work in Firefox??? Use Firefox. If enough people dump Google's malware browser, the web has to go back to supporting multiple browsers through open standards.
The more people use Firefox, the more web devs will be forced to ensure their website works on Firefox.
Have you reported issues for them? It's in the menu somewhere. If Mozilla get a lot of reports for particular sites, they reach out to the webmaster and try to work with them to improve Firefox support - usually by removing proprietary Chrome-only features or by removing reliance on Chrome bugs that don't exist in Firefox.
You can also report the issue at https://webcompat.com/, just search to see if it's already been reported first.
You can do that?
Yeah. Just double-checked on my computer. Open the menu then click "Report broken site" near the bottom.
So, what they're saying is: Chrome will have severely decreased functionality and users will no longer be able to protect themselves from sketchy ads that contain scams, malware, and other nefarious bullshit (often hosted on Google's own ad networks)?
load more comments
(13 replies)
Yeah, we saw this coming. When Manifest v3 first talked about.
Google an ad company are killing ad blockers. Yeah, that sounds right.
MV3 doesn't kill ad blockers. uBOL (uBlock Origin Lite) blocks ads, is by the same author and uses MV3. The issue is MV2 made it way too easy for malicious browser extensions to do bad things, like read the content of every page you visit. MV3 makes it much harder for malicious browser extensions to do these things, but makes it harder to do things like intercept network requests.
Some of these "features" that classic uBO used are available in MV3 but requires different permissions. Some of them could also be implemented with native messaging. The main uBO author though feels slighted by Google and went on a trash talking campaign against Google, and to be fair had a few good points. Anyway, most people on social media now care more about how Chromium and Firefox makes them feel now irregardless of facts. They think their emotions somehow are the same as facts.
And yet the likelihood of Google publishing a malicious extension is quite low. Not sure why you're so adamant about defending their shitty anti-adblock actions, making excuses for a mega corporation.
load more comments
(1 replies)
From my understanding, MV3 kills vital features of ad-blockers in that
- Some filtering rules do rely on the ability to read the content of the webpage, which can't be migrated, per the FAQ linked in the article
- The declarative API means an update to the rules requires an update to the plugin itself, which might get delayed by the reviewing process, causing the blocker to lag behind the tracker. It might not be able to recover as quickly as uBO in the recent YouTube catch-up round.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The issue is MV2 made it way too easy for malicious browser extensions to do bad things, like read the content of every page you visit. MV3 makes it much harder for malicious browser extensions to do these things, but makes it harder to do things like intercept network requests.
Then allow a savvy user to choose to keep MV2 mode via an opt-in control instead of depreciating years of hard work by non-malicious extension authors. uBlock Origin is, in fact, the ONLY browser extension I use in Chrome, as Firefox is my main browser.
I agree they should have tried to find more ways to keep the old behavior. MV3 rollout has already been delayed for a long time, and now users merely get a message. I'm not sure that the community (mostly Google contributors) won't give in or try to find a way to keep MV2. However, what was done with MV2 can now be done with MV3 with native messaging or other network tools... I think the concern is that allowing an exception makes it much easier for a malicious extension or software to get users to agree not realizing what they're agreeing to. Furthermore, the declarative approach is actually preferable by many. You get most of the same features without exposing all your traffic to an extension.
Firefox my beloved.
Saying this about any corporation's product is guaranteed not to age well.
Yeah, it's strange just how readily the blinders go up wherever Mozilla is concerned. They're a corp, just like any other; if they had the money and leverage, they'd be just as aggressive as Google. Have people already forgotten that time they laid off 200+ employees and then gave all the execs bonuses?
E: Apparently y'all have forgotten. In 2021, Mozilla laid off a few hundred employees. CEO's salary doubled that year. Fuck Mozilla, they're no more your friends than Google or Microsoft; they're the same evil, just smaller-scaled evil, is all.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I'll just side load it. Fuck you Google
view more: next ›