←back to thread

Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

(0x44.xyz)
1034 points deryilz | 1 comments | 12 Jul 25 19:06 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
al_borland ◴[12 Jul 25 20:51 UTC] No.44545060[source]▶
Even if bigs exists to work around what Google is doing, that isn’t the right way forward. If people don’t agree with Google move, the only correct course of action is to ditch Chrome (and all Chromium browsers). Hit them where it hurts and take away their monopoly over the future direction of the web.
replies(26): >>44545103 #>>44545185 #>>44545382 #>>44545931 #>>44545951 #>>44546164 #>>44546522 #>>44546599 #>>44546664 #>>44546763 #>>44547531 #>>44548200 #>>44548246 #>>44548399 #>>44548418 #>>44548820 #>>44549698 #>>44550098 #>>44550599 #>>44551061 #>>44551130 #>>44551663 #>>44553615 #>>44554220 #>>44556476 #>>44571602 #
phendrenad2 ◴[12 Jul 25 21:09 UTC] No.44545185[source]▶
A lot of people seem to believe that switching to a de-Googled Chromium-based browser isn't good enough. I think that's a psyop promoted by Google themselves. Firefox is different enough from Chrome that it's a big jump for people who are used to Chrome. Brave, custom Chromium builds, Vivaldi, etc. are all very similar to Google Chrome, they just don't have Google spy features.

The argument that "Google still controls Chromium so it's not good enough" is exactly the kind of FUD I'd expect to back up this kind of psyop, too.

replies(6): >>44545316 #>>44545393 #>>44545721 #>>44547185 #>>44547314 #>>44548110 #
sensanaty ◴[12 Jul 25 21:36 UTC] No.44545393[source]▶
> Firefox is different enough from Chrome that it's a big jump for people who are used to Chrome

I find this notion completely baffling. I use Chrome, Firefox and Safari more or less daily cause I test in all 3, and other than Safari feeling clunkier and in general less power-user friendly, I can barely tell the difference between the 3, especially between chrome and FF (well, other than uBlock working better in FF anyways).

replies(4): >>44545480 #>>44545548 #>>44545744 #>>44545751 #
const_cast ◴[12 Jul 25 21:48 UTC] No.44545480[source]▶
I agree, there's little to no friction in switching to Firefox and I have never, not even once, noticed a difference with websites. The same is not true for Safari.
replies(2): >>44545515 #>>44546019 #
jasonfarnon ◴[12 Jul 25 23:13 UTC] No.44546019{3}[source]▶
I get serious slowdown with multiple (3--5) youtube tabs open in firefox, but not chrome. Seems to happen when tabs are open for a long time (weeks), so probably some leak. Lots of others mention it on forums.
replies(1): >>44547350 #
1. thayne ◴[13 Jul 25 03:54 UTC] No.44547350{4}[source]▶
Google has a history of sabatoging Youtube on Firefox. See for example https://www.tomshardware.com/news/youtube-responds-to-delaye....

It isn't unique to youtube either. Gmail offline mode only works on chrome, even though other browsers have the necessary APIs. And menu copy and paste in google docs uses a special chrome-only extension that google pre-installs in chrome, instead of the clipboard API that works in other browsers as well.