Bypassing Google's big anti-adblock update

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.

A monopoly achieved thanks to everyone that forgot about IE lesson, and instead of learning Web standards, rather ships Chrome alongside their application.

> instead of learning Web standards, rather ships Chrome alongside their application

I am confused.

- The "shipping Chrome alongside their application" part seems to refer to Electron; but Electron is hardly guilty of what is described in the article.

- The "learning web standards" bit seems to impune web developers; but how are they guilty of the Chrome monopoly? If anything, they are guilty of shipping react apps instead of learning web standards; but react apps work equally well (or poorly) in all major browsers.

- Finally, how is Chrome incompatible with web standards? It is one of the best implementer of them.

> how is Chrome incompatible with web standards? It is one of the best implementer of them.

They have so much market share that they control the standards bodies. The tail wags the dog.

This is not true yet, but it’s getting close.

The pattern is this:

- Google publishes a specification.

- They raise request for feedback from the Mozilla and WebKit teams.

- Mozilla and WebKit find security and privacy problems.

- Google deploys their implementation anyway.

- This functionality gets listed on sites like whatpwacando.today

- Web developers complain about Safari being behind and accuse Apple of holding back the web.

- Nobody gives a shit about Firefox.

So we have two key problems, but neither of them are “Google controls the standards bodies”. The problem is that they don’t need to.

Firstly, a lot of web developers have stopped caring about the standards process. Whatever functionality Google adds is their definition of “the web”. This happened at the height of Internet Explorer dominance too. A huge number of web developers would happily write Internet Explorer-only sites and this monoculture damaged the web immensely. Chrome is the new Internet Explorer.

The second problem is that nobody cares about Firefox any more. The standards process doesn’t really work when there are only two main players. At the moment, you can honestly say “Look, the standards process is that any standard needs two interoperable implementations. If Google can’t convince anybody outside of Google to implement something, it can’t be a standard.” This makes the unsuitability of those proposals a lot plainer to see.

But now that Firefox market share has vanished, that argument is turning into “Google and Apple disagree about whether to add functionality to the web”. This hides the unsuitability of those proposals. This too has happened before – this is how the web worked when Internet Explorer was battling Netscape Navigator for dominance in the 90s, where browsers were adding all kinds of stupid things unilaterally. Again, Chrome is the new Internet Explorer.

The web standards process desperately needs either Firefox to regain standing or for a new independent rendering engine (maybe Ladybird?) to arise. And web developers need to stop treating everything that Google craps out as if it’s a done deal. Google don’t and shouldn’t control the definition of the web. We’ve seen that before, and a monoculture like that paralyses the industry.

> Mozilla and WebKit find security and privacy problems

This is a little disingenuous because Apple often falsely claims security when it’s to hold back tech that could loosen the App Store grasp.