434
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DarkGamer@kbin.social 161 points 1 year ago

Firefox looking better all the time...

[-] aeronmelon@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago

I've been using Safari exclusively since 2013, completely sidestepping all of this drama. I haven't seen an ad on YouTube in several years. I also haven't seen any hint of YouTube blocking my access to videos.

But for everyone who needs Windows, and the growing number of Linux users, FireFox seems like the only democratic option left.

[-] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 22 points 1 year ago

There are webkit based browsers on Linux as well, GNOME Web being one; but yeah, I prefer Firefox.

That's great, but on the downside you've been using the new Internet Explorer.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Delta_V@midwest.social 9 points 1 year ago

always has been

[-] Gazumi@lemmy.world 114 points 1 year ago
[-] Public_Tumbleweed@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ApeNo1@lemm.ee 88 points 1 year ago

“Manifest V3 will also put roadblocks up before extension updates, which will delay an extension developer's ability to quickly respond to changes.”

Can’t wait for a day zero exploit to let rip and its impact and exposure increased because of an extension’s developer inability to promptly patch their software. I hope they are considering more than just ad revenue but somehow I doubt it.

[-] viking@infosec.pub 6 points 1 year ago

They allow extensions to be sold and completely reworked without telling the user jack shit. So I doubt they care about that either.

[-] skozzii@lemmy.ca 85 points 1 year ago

Stop using chrome, let the market share dry up. The only reason they can get away with this is because they have a monopoly and surely its against anti-competition laws. But who is gonna try and take on google in court?

Break up tech giants.

Welcome to our hellish future.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] theodewere@kbin.social 55 points 1 year ago

this is when a company needs to be broken into pieces.. when instead of providing new benefits, the company seeks to control access to its product, and control the market.. i want my government to break Google into bits..

[-] aeronmelon@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Google already did the hard work, too. Just make each letter within Alphabet its own company.

[-] netchami@sh.itjust.works 51 points 1 year ago
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] SuperSpaceFan@lemm.ee 31 points 1 year ago

This tactic seems short-sighted to me. It will force migrate people to firefox.

[-] Zarxrax@lemmy.world 68 points 1 year ago

No one is moving to Firefox, because most people don't care. Just like people stay on Reddit or X, they are going to stay on chrome. Google will feed them shit and they'll ask for more.

All we can do is worry about ourselves and keep trying to make alternatives viable.

[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 27 points 1 year ago

If people care about using adblock, they will.

[-] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago

Most people don't. How do you think in 2023 Google is still raking in millions of dollars nonstop?

[-] b3an@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

By cheating, being anticompetitive, and strong arming with legal action.

[-] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

...And by having millions of people view ads.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Fades@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Choice of browser is nothing like the choice of social media, the fuck are you talking about??

One of THE biggest reasons Redditors didn’t leave was because there was more content and already established communities niche as well as large.

With a browser change, you still get the exact same content. Worthless comparison

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] takeda@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

This will make many of them care.

[-] dirtbiker509@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

It's not "no one", Because I left reddit and I left chrome. Lemmy and Firefox!

But yeah not many people will actually do it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ieightpi@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Please tell me that Google was so tone deaf that they actually made a starte page banner for the anniversary of Monopoly or something.

[-] tigerjerusalem@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Can someone clarify why browsers other than the ones that are Chrome based are forced to adopt Manifest v3? What happens if the don't, are they blocked from the web or something?

[-] ShittyKopper@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They aren't forced to do anything. Manifest v3 is just a part of the WebExtensions API (which is not a standard and is really just "whatever Chrome does except we find/replace'd the word chrome to browser") which both Safari and Firefox chose to implement in order to make porting of Chrome extensions easier.

Before that, Firefox had a much more powerful extension system that allowed extensions quite a lot of access to browser internals, but that turned out to be a maintenance nightmare so they walled those APIs off (not a coincidence that Firefox started getting massive performance improvements after that, and extensions stopped breaking every other release) and decided to go the WebExtensions route. I have no clue what Safari was up to but I think they implemented it after.

If they don't implement Manifest v3, extensions that want to work across multiple browsers need to support both the older Manifest v2 and the later Manifest v3, which would be a burden not many extension authors would want to bother with, which would make them just say "yeah we're not supporting anything outside Chrome". Firefox avoids this problem by extending the v3 API to allow for the functionality necessary for powerful ad blocking Google removed in v3 (webRequestBlocking) while also implementing the new thing (declarativeNetRequest) side by side, so extensions that want to take advantage of the powerful features on Firefox can do so, while Chrome extensions that are fine with the less powerful alternative can still be ported over relatively easily.

Firefox does have it's fair share of extensions on top of the WebExtension API already (sidebar support for one), so adding one more isn't too big of a deal.

[-] ripcord@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

Very, very good summary. Thank you.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Can someone clarify why browsers other than the ones that are Chrome based are forced to adopt Manifest v3?

See, that's the thing: pretty much every browser except Firefox is Chrome-based. When people talk about browsers being forced to accept manifest v3, they're talking about all the Chrome-based browsers other than Chrome.

[-] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

why browsers other than the ones that are Chrome based are forced to adopt Manifest v3?

Then the only browser left is Firefox. Edge, Opera, Brave, Vivaldi and a long etc are all Chromium based.

There is also Safari, but Safari does not support WebExtensions in the first place so it does not apply here.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jdrch@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago
[-] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Edge is an euphemism for Microsoft Chrome.

[-] Patches@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 year ago

Why just be tracked by Google? When you can be tracked by both Google and Microsoft!

[-] netchami@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

That sounds truly awesome /s

[-] netchami@sh.itjust.works 44 points 1 year ago

Edge is the worst recommendation I've ever seen in my life

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] peg@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Won't Edge and all Chromium-based browsers end up with Manifest v3 and no v2? Will extension devs continue to support v2 in Firefox?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Yes it does still exist. It came preinstalled with the ThinkPad I set up for my daughter yesterday. That's why I immediately installed Firefox and made it the default browser instead.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] recapitated@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Firefox works lovely

[-] Tattorack@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I don't use chrome, so I don't care until it starts effecting the Fox.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] trslim@pawb.social 11 points 1 year ago

Boy! Glad i dont use chrome!

[-] ConstipatedWatson@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I know this will irk some people but... Do you know why using Gmail or YouTube on Firefox feels slower on an Apple computer?

I use Firefox on Android exclusively, but on Apple computers I still use Chrome more since Firefox seems to either be slow on certain websites or use too much memory (I'm sure it's not Mozilla's fault here)

BTW I actually donate to Mozilla because I think it needs to survive (though it must be a drop compared to what Google pays Mozilla and I hope they keep doing it), but I'm not using Firefox all the time as I'd like, since the experience looks a tad worse on Desktop

[-] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Google makes their websites slower in Firefox. I don't think this is related to Apple at all. You'll probably have the same experience in Linux or Windows with Firefox and Google. They just want you to use Chrome.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 7 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


YouTube can instantly switch up its ad delivery system, but once Manifest V3 becomes mandatory, that won't be true for extension developers.

If ad blocking is a cat-and-mouse game of updates and counter-updates, then Google will force the mouse to slow down.

The current platform, Manifest V2, has been around for over ten years and works just fine, but it's also quite powerful and allows extensions to have full filtering control over the traffic your web browser sees.

Engadget's Anthony Ha interviewed some developers in the filtering extension community, and they described a constant cat-and-mouse game with YouTube.

Firefox's Manifest V3 implementation doesn't come with the filtering limitations, and parent company Mozilla promises that users can "rest assured that in spite of these changes to Chrome’s new extensions architecture, Firefox’s implementation of Manifest V3 ensures users can access the most effective privacy tools available like uBlock Origin and other content-blocking and privacy-preserving extensions."

Google claims that Manifest V3 will improve browser "privacy, security, and performance," but every comment we can find from groups that aren't giant ad companies disputes this description.


The original article contains 915 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
434 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

60086 readers
4254 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS