Reminder to switch browsers if you haven’t already!


  • Google Chrome is starting to phase out older, more capable ad blocking extensions in favor of the more limited Manifest V3 system.
  • The Manifest V3 system has been criticized by groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation for restricting the capabilities of web extensions.
  • Google has made concessions to Manifest V3, but limitations on content filtering remain a source of skepticism and concern.
  • enbyecho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    This post reminded me to try out Brave. It’s based on Chromium but purports to block ads and trackers…

    Anybody else use it?

    • astropenguin5@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      They still might be forced to follow chromium’s manifest v3 ant ad locking stuff though, we’ll just have to see.

    • cyberic@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      My brother uses it, just remember to look through the ad settings. There was a toggle at one point to allow their approved ads or something like that.

      • kusivittula@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        i tried brave recently after finding out it’s open source, and that setting is off by default. ended up keeping firefox, because on android somehow the new tab page in brave is even worse than in ff. too tricky to access bookmarks.

        • ruse8145@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I still to this day don’t know how to get back to the tab I was on in firefox-android if I get to the new tab screen. It’s been 2 or 3 years since the redesign.

          • kusivittula@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            you need to close keyboard, hit the tab icon on the address bar and select the tab. easier way is to open some recent website and either close the current one or swipe from the address bar. it’s stupid.

      • RokAlamSeth@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Too bad for your little black and white worldview those are the same people against adblockers. The good thing is this world has sensible people like me who could give less of a fuck who’s feeling is getting hurt and only care about our browsing experience. The rest can go die for all I care.

      • enbyecho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        How does this relate to Brave browser?

        Edit: I had no idea about the CEO. So yeah, not gonna ever use that.

        • ruse8145@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          yep :(

          very disappointing all round. on a sliding scale thats not the worst thing brave has done, but given that the entire browser was literally birthed from “we don’t want your hate here” its hard to avoid.

  • Tag365@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Now we gotta have websites developing for all web browsers instead of Google Chrome like it’s Internet Explorer 2.0.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      There are effectively only two web browsers: Chrome and Firefox. Literally everything else, aside from some really niche things that can’t render modern webpages, is a fork of one of those two that uses the same rendering engine.

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Not to toot the kagi Horn, but they are talking about releasing thier webkit based Orion Browser on Linux. Ive been following that one closely since it has firefox extension support.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I mean, if folks really want something like that, I’d say they shouldn’t have let KDE’s KHTML (which is what WebKit was forked from) die. But as I’ve said elsewhere in this thread, KHTML→WebKit→Blink are related and thus fail to combat Google’s web hegemony the way that Gecko (Firefox) does.

        • breakingcups@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’ve become very skeptical of anything Kagi, wishing they’d just focused on making one thing good instead of getting distracted by mediocre AI and a browser they can’t realistically support while their search is still subpar. Illusions of grandeur.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          You mean KHMTL, born in KDE’s Konqueror. That spawned WebKit (Safari), that spawned Blink (Chrome, Edge, Opera, etc). The whole thing then finally came full-circle when Konqueror dropped KHTML due to lack of development, now you have the choice between WebKit and Blink (via Qt WebEngine).

          Then there’s Gecko (Firefox) and Servo which had a near-death experience after Mozilla integrated half of it into Gecko but by now development is alive and kicking again. Oh and then there’s lynx, using libwww, tracing its lineage back straight to Tim Berners Lee.

          • ripcord@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            No, they don’t mean KHTML. KHTML is an ancestor of WebKit and Blink, but WebKit forked from it over 2 decades ago. They meant WebKit.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              They also didn’t mean lynx and yet I mentioned it. How come? Might the distinct possibility exist that I used the opportunity to draw a wider picture, and “you mean X” has to be understood as internet brain-rot rhetorics, not literally?

              Just a suggestion.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Nope, it doesn’t count. The only reason Safari/WebKit isn’t considered a fork of Chrome/Blink is that Chrome/Blink is a fork of Safari/WebKit instead.

          • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’m sure they’ve diverged enough for it to be pretty significant compared to the Chromium browsers

          • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            So it wasn’t, like, forked hard enough that now after the years it counts as a different browser? Expect it to render pages ‘n’ stuff pretty much like Chrome?

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Pretty great outcome for firefox really.

      I don’t think firefox numbers will get a huge & immediate bump, but I think that over time it will support a reputation for firefox as being cool different and just plain better.

      I can’t imagine raw-dogging the internet without an ad blocker in 2024. I’m aware that most people aren’t bothered by ads, but surely… surely some people might be interested in blocking them if they become aware that it’s possible and easy.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Switched to Firefox at work today. Looks like I still need Chrome to do the VPN handshake, but the more of us there are, the more pressure we have on IT!

    • Emptiness@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m still confounded by workplaces that run the old nineties way of VPN handshake by browser. Clunky, clumsy just straight up bad digital workplace setup.

      There is no reason to not do it the modern way where all the handshaking and connecting is done under the hood, hidden from the user. At the most you as a user should only see the tiny little systray icon switch how it looks.

        • AnActOfCreation@programming.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I have no idea. I’d guess not, as it’s not a strong fork like other Chromium-based browsers. Its main selling point is that it’s nearly identical to Chrome, but with a lot of the Google garbage stripped out. I don’t use it as a daily driver, but only when I need something Chromium-based like the use case mentioned by @OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml. It’s very likely to work wherever Chrome does.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I don’t have official information, but I doubt it. They tend to stick as closely to the Chromium experience as possible, with the exception of the ungoogled part, of course. Maintaining Manifest V2 support would also just be a massive amount of work, for which they likely don’t have the manpower.

  • parpol@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    What does google expect users to do once they realize they get better extensions with firefox?

    Imagine ad blockers not working on youtube only on chromium browsers, or tracking cookies/pixels/scripts not being blockable only on chromium browsers.

    • exanime@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      What does google expect users to do once they realize they get better extensions with firefox?

      If that happens en masse, which is extremely unlikely, Google can just pull its funding for Mozilla and cripple them

      The entire sector is fucked because of lack of regulation

      • overload@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I think people just genuinely don’t know that firefox (and I suppose Safari) is the only true alternative browser i.e. Not based on chromium.

        I do my best to transition people I know across, but people are retty comfortable on chrome. If ad blockers stop working, I think there will be people who care just enough to switch.

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Used Firefox on and off since it came around, not a fan. But if chromium blocks ad-blockers, I’m switching instantly. I doubt many people know or care enough to switch.

          • overload@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I’ve been on Firefox almost exclusively for about a decade and I can’t really tell the difference between them honestly in terms of performance of normal web browsing.

            I’m having some weird graphical issues with my NAS frontend Web portal display on Firefox atm though, so keep chromium installed for that.

            • NoRodent@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I honestly don’t understand why anyone would refuse to switch from away Chrome. It’s not like the other browsers lack functionality or are slow. The only problem they might encounter is some rare incompatibility which is the result of Firefox (and its forks) small market share and web devs not caring enough.

              I’ve never used Chrome as my primary browser and I don’t think I missed anything. I started using Opera years before Chrome was even a thing (back when everyone was using IE) and then when the old Opera died, I didn’t think even for a second about switching to Chrome and went straight to Firefox. Which could at least be highly customized to bring some Opera exclusive features (eg. mouse gestures, tab grouping) back.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think people just genuinely don’t know that firefox (and I suppose Safari) is the only true alternative browser i.e. Not based on chromium.

          Safari is only “not based on Chromium” in the sense that the heredity goes in the other direction (Chromium is based on it).

          Firefox is the only browser that maintains a rendering engine codebase fully separate from Chrome. That’s why using Firefox, and evangelizing it to help keep up its marketshare, is so vitally important for the health of the web.

          • overload@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Huh, I didn’t know that about Safari/Chromium. Absolutely agree that having a Google-controlled browser monopoly would be catastrophic.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I think, they just stopped caring about users instead. They’ve got enough market share. Might as well internet-explorer it for a while.

    • Wild_Mastic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      80% of people I know does not use an ad block, even the ones more tech savvy. I have no clue how brainwashed they are for eating ad garbage all day.

      • NoRodent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        To be fair, let’s be glad that 80% of people don’t use an ad block. If it were the opposite and 80% did use ad block, web services would be much more aggressive in combating ad blockers and many more of them would end up pay-walled (although it seems we’re heading there anyway).

        On one hand, I feel kinda bad that my ad-free experience is only supported thanks to those who do undergo the torture of ads, on the other hand, the companies have only themselves to blame. If web ads were decent, only limited to sides and headers or even between paragraphs of web pages and didn’t cover the content you’re trying to view, didn’t try to trick you into thinking it’s part of the content, didn’t lead to malicious websites, didn’t autoplay videos with sound or didn’t put unskippable ads before and inside videos, I would have never felt the need to install an ad block.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Other groups don’t agree with Google’s description, like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which called Manifest V3 “deceitful and threatening” back when it was first announced in 2019, saying the new system “will restrict the capabilities of web extensions—especially those that are designed to monitor, modify, and compute alongside the conversation your browser has with the websites you visit.”

    Google, which makes about 77 percent of its revenue from advertising, has not published a serious explanation as to why Manifest V3 limits content filtering, and it’s not clear how that aligns with the goals of “improving the security, privacy, performance and trustworthiness.”

    Like Kewisch said, the primary goal of malicious extensions is to spy on users and slurp up data, which has nothing to do with content filtering.

    Google now says it’s possible for extensions to skip the reviews process for “safe” rule set changes, but even this is limited to “static” rulesets, not more powerful “dynamic” ones.

    In a comment to The Verge last year, the senior staff technologist at the EFF, Alexei Miagkov, summed up Google’s public negotiations with the extension community well, saying, "These are helpful changes, but they are tweaks to a limited-by-design system.

    For a short period, users will be able to turn them back on if they visit the extension page, but Google says that “over time, this toggle will go away as well.”


    The original article contains 692 words, the summary contains 230 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Oh no! Wait, I don’t use that shit because of shit like this.

  • HonorableScythe@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’d be glad to switch back to Firefox, but websites straight up don’t work on it anymore. That was the only reason I went to Chrome.

      • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        There are some sites out there that won’t work. ESC Configurator won’t work in Firefox because it needs web serial to program an ESC connected over a serial port. That’s the only site I use that I have to run in chrome. I’m sure there are more out there, but they are not very common.

    • fuzzzerd@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      What websites? I use Firefox as my daily driver on desktop and mobile, and I rarely run into problems. Like so infrequently that I don’t even remember the last time.

        • airglow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          No problems loading that page on Firefox for Android or desktop for me. Are you using Firefox or a fork of Firefox? Do you have any extensions or about:config changes that may be affecting the page rendering?

      • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Same. My Dark Reader doesn’t always show websites properly but Firefox hasn’t let me down in ages.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I encourage those in this situation to do their small, small part in fighting for the future of the open web by only switching to Chrome when necessary.

      Which is almost never in my daily life!

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s a reason to insist on Firefox even harder. Fuck those websites!

  • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I really like KDEs Falkon browser, based on QT web.

    But it having no extension support kind of kills it for me…

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It’s Chromium under the hood.

        Funnily, KDE’s early KHTML engine got forked into WebKit, which got forked into Blink, which is at the heart of Chromium. So, we’ve gone full circle…