Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

(0x44.xyz)

1034 points deryilz | 1 comments | 12 Jul 25 19:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.213s | 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 #

qoez ◴[13 Jul 25 14:12 UTC] No.44550599[source]▶

>>44545060 #

I just tried firefox because of this update but I had to switch back because it's so slow. Sacrificing competitive advantage stings too much to much just for this.

replies(2): >>44550645 #>>44551985 #

1. bornfreddy ◴[13 Jul 25 17:29 UTC] No.44551985[source]▶

>>44550599 #

Yeah, it's not Firefox that is slow, it is Google properties that are slow on Firefox. Otherwise FF is fast, or at least Chrome is just as slow or slower (judging by seeing others use it).

I mostly avoid Google websites, but when I can't, I always use Brave/Edge/Chromium on those. E.g. Google Earth is especially useless outside of Chrome-land.

Firefox (with uBO) also probably wins any realistic speed comparison simply because it still supports MV2. I really don't care how fast the ads are loaded, I prefer blocking them. Especially the most privacy invading ones (i.e. by Google).

↑