←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: 0.218s | 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 #
thayne ◴[13 Jul 25 03:14 UTC] No.44547185[source]▶
Has any chromium based browser committed to continue supporting MV2 or building an alternative API for ad-blockers to intercept web requests in MV3 even after the code for MV2 is removed from upstream chromium?

If not, then no, switching to another chromium based browser is not enough.

And fwiw my experience trying Brave was that the user experience was actually more different from chrome than Firefox.

replies(1): >>44555686 #
1. phendrenad2 ◴[14 Jul 25 01:49 UTC] No.44555686[source]▶
MV3 was FUD. But what's interesting is how FUD spreads. There were some people who identified that MV3 severely limits adblockers. That's true. There were some people who had an agenda who exaggerated the effects of those limits, making it seem like ad blocking would not work in MV3. Then there were people who read those articles, and believed them without question. There are a lot of them commenting on every thread about browsers.

I suggested that MV3 would be a big nothing from the beginning. And people on HN argued with me every step of the way (mostly people in the latter category who refused to do even the slightest bit of research or verify that the people who they were parroting were actually reliable reporters of anything at all).

Now that MV3 is here, we can see this. MV3 is here. MV2 is gone. And ad blocking still works.

I just installed Google Chrome, clicked on some YouTube videos, and verified that I was getting ads. Then I installed Ublock Origin Lite, and the ads disappeared. I no longer get display ads or video ads on any website.

Now, if you want to bring up some edge case or something, be my guest. But for 99% of even ad block users, strictly speaking, blocking ads is more than enough.