Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

I don't "bypass" Chrome when they want to melt my brain with their business model, I use Firefox. I don't "bypass" Windows when they want to melt my brain with their business model, I use Linux. No idea why so many "hackers" doing "bypasses" can't instead take action that is simpler, long lasting, and easier. Do people need to jerked around 50 times for 20 years before realizing it will keep happening and their "bypasses" are just temporary bandaids?

Great, except firefox is pretty bad nowadays.

Not their fault of course, with people not testing websites on non chrome derived browsers.

> except firefox is pretty bad nowadays.

Pretty bad as in that isn't true?

Firefox is the option that doesn't intentionally leave users vulnerable to hostile adtech. Firefox is the option with containers. Past that it is performant and reliable under a wide variety of user loads and platforms.

or Pretty bad as in Firefox+forks are better than the alternatives?

It is true that some unfortunate default options were recently added to Firefox configs.

Those options are unfortunate because they are variants of anti-user options baked into Chromium - options created to keep Chromium users susceptible to big-tech's worst intentions.

Those "default options" are precisely "intentionally leav[ing] users vulnerable to hostile ad tech" (e.g. PPA). It's built into the browser and on by default. Mozilla have very explicitly stated they believe ads are critical for the web. It is still better the chrome though (and a patch set like librewolf is better still).

> Those "default options" are precisely "intentionally leav[ing] users vulnerable to hostile ad tech" (e.g. PPA).

The difference between Firefox's 1x and Chromium's 100x + 100x is in the degree of harm visited upon the user.

Finding harsh fault with former while giving the much more egregious example a pass -- this makes sense if one feels Firefox isn't abusive enough towards it's users.