• Kokesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    And what? If someone can live with ads, they can stay. Otherwise anyone can install Firefox. I was all-in Google since the beginning of Gmail. And switching to Firefox was completely painless. Everything works the same, times of website incompatibility are long gone.

    • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I really wish Firefox implemented easily switchable browser profiles. I am use Firefox mainly but for work I’ll still use edge so I can use this feature.

      • cschreib@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I don’t know exactly what part of a separate profile you are after, so this may not be a 100% substitute, but I found container tabs in Firefox to work quite well (with some extensions to improve UX). It’s still the same profile though, so passwords and history are shared.

    • Mwa@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      some people dont want firefox bcs its kinda slower then chromium based tbh but it aint bad am not saying firefox is bad

    • Integrate777@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      What if websites decide that chrome users earn much more ad revenue and start forcing users to switch with those “This website only supports Chrome” error messages? What if this practice gets popular? I’m sure there are ways to get around it, but the average users who bothered switching to Firefox at all, will just conclude that anything except chrome has a bad browsing experience.

      • gwen@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        i never understood how those messages work? like how would using firefox ruin your website? or how they even detect firefox in the first place lmfao

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          They can in theory make tricks showing that you are using an ad blocker or a specific browser. Even if you set Chrome’s user agent in Firefox.

          I personally wouldn’t make such effort to use such websites then.

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s all fun and games till they check for web USB support. They don’t need to actually use web USB but it’s a telltale sign that you’re not on Chrome.

            • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              A plugin could very easily have Firefox claim to support WebUSB, but return no devices or junk devices. Some of the anti-fingerprinting add-ons already do, iirc.

              • linearchaos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                You get my point though, all they need to do is start supporting a feature that’s not easy to spoof.

                The real defense against this is for people to refuse to use Chrome. It’s not the tail that wags the dog, Make The Firefox user base so big the developers can’t ignore it. Basically IE all over again

                • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I agree with your conclusion, but as long as they’re offering data up for download to your machine, they really can’t control how you access it or what application you use for it. That doesn’t mean it’ll be easy, but even if it requires reverse-engineering some website DRM, somebody’s going to do it. And if Chromium remains FOSS, it won’t even be terribly difficult.

                  Remember, they tried to defeat ad blockers on YouTube, and they gave up because it wasn’t worth it. uBO was updating to block their attempts within hours. They’ve tested inserting the ads in the video stream, but that’s probably also not going to last for long.

                  They’re trying to assert an ownership over the Web; and yes, the best way to defeat it is to build a strong and united resistance against it. But even if we don’t, there are ways to quietly refuse to comply.

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Then apple would whip out their giant throbbing cock and smack them with it because they want people using safari.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Issue is, a lot of people think the only browser in existence is “google”. I even had people looking me at funny for having an e-mail address ending in outlook.com rather than the usual gmail.com, and not because of some anti-MS sentiment, but because they thought e-mail was invented by Google, hance the name “gmail”.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        but because they thought e-mail was invented by Google, hance the name “gmail”.

        Life is scary.

      • abbadon420@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’ve been been a full time Firefox user for three years now. Haven’t experience a single problem like that. Haven’t really experienced any problem at all to be honest

          • abbadon420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            NewPipe exclusively. YouTube has been unusable long before I fully moved back to FireFox.

          • abbadon420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I know. My experience with Chrome used to be good too. And we all know what’s up now.

            If Firefox fucks up, I’m fine with abandoning ship and moving on to the next thing. I’m not sure what that would be, but I’m sure I’ll figure that out once we get there.

              • abbadon420@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                That is concerning, but Internet Explorer used to be the only option too. Of course things are different now, but I have faith (for lack of anything else).

            • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Thats the thing.

              There is basically no alternative. Firefox exists on the mercy of google which is its biggest donor.

              There are very few attempts at a truly open source browser and neither can tackle the biggest problem, which is google pushing websites to adopt their standards, weaponizing ad income to guarantee compliance.

              Currently more then 80% of internet users have a chromium browser while websites creation for many entities is often outsourced out of lack of own IT knowledge. When firefox dies there will be no economic insensitive to build sites accessible by anything but chromium.

              Low key i wish this fires back into anarchy. I hate the corporate web and the only sites i like to see are those free of economic insensitive and all in on an ethical free digital world.

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Unfortunately that has not been the case for me. Some sites for buying concert tickets don’t seem to like Firefox.

          I’ve had problems with several Microsoft sites we use internally for work ever since Edge went to Chrome.

          It’s not Firefox’s fault. Mozilla is abiding by web standards.

          • Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you find any websites that don’t work with firefox, you should report them to Mozilla. Firefox has a list of known bad websites, and has fixes for them, usually just a user agent override.

        • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          try changing your user-agent to mock chrome in Firefox while you visit YouTube.

          you should see a drastic difference in UX.

          • abbadon420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I tried YouTube in Chrome on desktop (for about 2 minutes) and I didn’t notice any difference. I’ll just keep using NewPipe on my phone though.

            • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              it takes a whole 10 extra seconds for the interface to be usable for me in Firefox. but not when I spoof the user-agent as chrome.

              at least that’s how it was about 4 months ago.

      • Kokesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’ve cried also in dev a lot in the past, but mostly don’t cry so much anymore

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      times of website incompatibility are long gone

      I wish I could agree with that. Hell, I have to use Chrome to download my phone bill from Virgin, and a couple of others don’t work.

      And don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming FF. It’s these lazy web developers that only target Chrome. I’m sure Safari users get the same shit experience.

  • ObliviousEnlightenment@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Can we get a fork orba dedicated browser that stays on manifest v2? Even Firefoxs lack of plans is disconcerting. I want expmicit plans to not play along

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Think of it as an iceberg & Chrome users as a boat.

      Assuming no changes, this is landing in Chrome Canary now, so we’re watching the Chrome Canary boat hit the iceberg. The Chrome Beta boat is going to hit in a few weeks. Finally the Chrome Stable boat is scheduled to hit in mid November.

      Now Google may choose to hold back actually enabling this flag immediately. It wouldn’t be the first delay. But likely in mid November is when all the posts will start to appear of people asking where their ad blocker went.

      (Although I’m guessing it actually is delayed until after the holidays and in the new year, but that’s just wild speculation.)

  • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m being downvoted heavily on Reddit for suggesting thorium instead of Chrome.

    My guess is bots as thorium is way faster and the dev hates the thought of a chromium browser without Adblock.

    Moronically I think the Reddit hive mind is following that opinion and I may have to delete the comment or face site wide blacklisting which is what usually happens.

        • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’ll take your word for it but between all the nonsense Google and Mozilla have pulled I’m not sure where to place my belief.

          I’m sticking to thorium for now because it’s fast and does what I want in a browser

    • Blaster M@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Thorium doesn’t support secure streaming, so while it was amazeballs fast, it wasn’t useful. Ended up picking Vivaldi for watching streaming.

    • Mwa@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      tbh i dont like thoriums update cycle you stay on 1 version for 4 months the firefox fork is even worse thats why i use ungoogled chromium instead

      • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Kinda agree it should have an update built in, I’m using Chris Titus’s update script to update it Which to be honest doesn’t seem to update it much.

        I’m mostly basing my use on it being quite fast and the dev cursing out Google and swearing to keep Ublock.

  • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hopefully wikipedia recognizes this as the official Canary in the Chrome mine. I was first impressed with chrome book because of seeing them used for education, getting my own laptop during school would’ve been mindblowing to kid me. I was unimpressed with the strangulation process of the OS but again shocked when they added a linux boot mode. There needs to be better alternatives by now, I would be ok with an OS developed by the department of education in conjunction with higher educational institutions. Could have a decent non-profit approach to a browser and ad blockers could legitimately be built in as a “protect the children” aim of approach.

    • hedgehogging_the_bed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I take it you’ve never been involved in such an endeavor? What you propose would take a decade a minimum due to the sheer number of nested advisory committees that would be required for those groups to interface. Better a non-profit group begins the work and then solicits these group’s input at the design stage.

  • rickdg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I used to recommend uBlock as a no-brainer, now folks really need to change towards a better browser.

    • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Or get network wide blocking. Doesn’t prevent everything but it does prevent most ads. Makes the internet tolerable at least.

              • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
                cake
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Wouldn’t a company VPN bypass all that even though you are using your own internet connection to connect to the outside world?

                • kill_dash_nine@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Typically yes, assuming that the company VPN sets DNS to a set of company DNS servers. That is how my company’s works and several others I’ve worked for in the past.

                • kjaeselrek@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Maybe, I guess I don’t know enough to answer that. I do know that being on a company VPN isn’t always a requirement, though.

                  Either way, I’m not trying to argue for one approach to ad blocking over another as a one-size-fits-all solution, I just wanted to point out that it’s possible to have more control over the network than the computer in some cases.

          • shininghero@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Depends on how lax the IT department is when it comes to random executables. I was able to move the firefox installer to the appdata root, and run a non-admin install to my user profile.

          • qprimed@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            sadly, agreed. mindshare leads to adoption, tho - so putting Firefox in front of more faces is always a positive. after all, its how google dominates.

      • datendefekt@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Pihole is good for a private network, but you can forget it in a work setting, especially corporate networks.

      • rickdg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Something like NextDNS as a no-brainer? It works but hits the limit of the free tier if people use it beyond their phone.

        • nfh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          PiHole and a TailScale exit node so you can use it for DNS whether or not you’re on your home network.

          • Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Or a variation of this is TailScale configured to use NextDNS and a TS exit node. That’s for anyone who doesn’t want to maintain a PiHole. I’ve done both. Personal choice.

  • kamen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hoping that Vivaldi is going to hold off somehow - perhaps with their built-in ad blocker. And before you say “switch to Firefox”, I’ll say I’m not gonna, at least not until I see native mouse gestures implemented and working everywhere.

      • kamen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Fair enough. All I’m saying is that mouse gestures are so much ingrained in my muscle memory that their absence in native capacity (and reliance on extensions for that) is a show-stopper for me.

        • downhomechunk@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I get it. Date your distro, marry your browser.

          I miss the level of customization you could do in Vivaldi, down to minute details. But I don’t miss it enough to put up with ads and tracking nonsense.

          I started on Firefox back when it was a beta called Phoenix. I eventually moved to chromium based browsers like the rest of the world, but now I’m back. I’ve come full circle!

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Maybe we’re thinking about this wrong. Maybe we should all start running plugins that just load whatever ads that show up in the background hundreds of times without showing them to us. Every viewer is thousands upon thousands of impressions and click through rates become absolutely miserable. We can make the ads worthless or maybe even make them cost a significant amount of money to host.

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s mildly effective in the sense that it will decimate click-through rates, but if enough people did it, they would start filtering by IP, and you’d need to change how many ads it clicks on so it looks more human.

        It also still gives advertisers your data, since it still has to load the ads on your system to click them, so it’s not as privacy-preserving as a full-on adblocker that outright blocks every advertisement and tracker related network request in the first place.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, I don’t want to use it because I don’t want them to get some weird over fitted model of my behavior.

    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Careful, there are some edgy people out there who don’t want to use more than one browser because Firefox doesn’t work with their cameras /s

      Meanwhile, I’ll still be using Firefox too

        • ramble81@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          May be bad phrasing, but Firefox doesn’t support h.265 so there’s limitations with streaming video on some camera platforms and other sites.

        • thejml@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          People who have to use their browser for telehealth and virtual teller banking access.

          Sadly these are also things that require better security.

          • Cadeillac@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yup. Firefox doesn’t work for me unfortunately, so I have to maintain Chrome on at least one device for these things

            • Optional@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Hey, member when you always had to have IE for one of “those” sites and it was basically just an awful browser everyone was forced to have like as a legal requirement or something?

              Heh. IE. Then when you’d use it to download firefox it’d say “Nooooo! Wait! I’m teh Best Browser!!” Hahahahah

              IE. Ded.

        • Zink@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I use MS teams for meetings every day at work, in Firefox, in Linux. It’s nice that even the camera works when I need it to.

        • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s so frustratingly annoying. I primarily use Firefox, but switch to Chrome for specific Google services on my mobile. Once in a while, the search suggests I take a photo? Why?

        • JustARegularNerd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I do this with Discord and Zoom as an alternative to installing their actual apps. 99% of the functionality is there anyway, and the 1% is stuff I don’t want anyway

        • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          People who use Webex, zoom, etc for one use in try browser and don’t normally use those links. Happens at work when an outside vendor doesn’t use what we do.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        No they didn’t.

        They’re still there. Ublock origin is the god-tier adblock, and it’s still there. It’s even a Recommended by Mozilla extension.

        • Don_alForno@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I think people don’t hate Mozilla, they want them to do better as there are not many options left if you care about privacy. It’d just be nice to not have to pick the lesser evil for once.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            And they are doing better. Making ads private is a very good thing. They’re currently a privacy nightmare.

            • Don_alForno@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              They are not making ads private, they are adding another tracking vector. This will not get rid of the other ones already there.

              • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                No they weren’t. Clearly you don’t know how this system works.

                It is impossible to track anybody using this.

                You are getting angry at Mozilla for making something that enables privacy, then getting angry at them again because they aren’t dictators of the web who can control everybody’s and networks.

                • Don_alForno@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  In their own words

                  PPA does not involve sending information about your browsing activities to anyone. This includes Mozilla and our DAP partner (ISRG). Advertisers only receive aggregate information that answers basic questions about the effectiveness of their advertising.

                  So, let’s say I trust in everything they are saying, which is the absolute best case scenario, then they have done nothing for privacy, because the whole premise that ad networks only care about ex-post measuring the effectiveness of their ads is false. They could have done that long before.

                  They want to know who you are and what you do so they can sort you in categories and show you specific ads based on those. That’s the service ad networks sell to advertisers. So, tracking as usual will continue.

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I don’t think Lemmy users hate Firefox. I feel like alot of it is either people who legitimately have whatever needs they have, fulfilled by chrome more than firefox, or…it’s fucking astroturfers/fanboys.

          Edit Addendum: Also, if anything, Lemmy users fucking love Firefox.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I don’t mean all Lemmy users. I mean a surprisingly large amount that non-stop hate on Mozilla and Firefox.

            I’ve even seen two users that hate Mozilla/Firefox so much that they wrote about it in their account bio, which I find crazy.

            • Cypher@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Mozilla have made a series of unpopular choices, especially their enabling of telemetry for advertisers that does nothing to benefit users.

              It is no surprise some people are vocally unhappy.

              • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Private ads that make user tracking impossible absolutely benefits users, and the ad industry would be a lot less of a cancerous cesspit if it were the norm.

                It’s certainly been unpopular, but that’s more because most people on Lemmy don’t read past ragebait headlines and assume the worst.

                • Cypher@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It’s just another source of telemetry for advertisers and won’t stop any of the existing methods of tracking.

      • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        From what I’ve heard, they only “removed” uBlock Origin Lite. Normal uBO is still up.

      • Voyajer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        The one they removed isn’t relevant until Firefox also removes manifest V2 which they have no plans for.

        • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Firefox has a different manifest v3 that still retains webrequest functionality, so even when they do switch over it’ll be fine.

  • figaro@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m currently using safari on a MacBook. Way more power efficient than chrome.