Why does this title significantly differ from the article? The article presents no evidence nor claims that anyone lied.
But every single one of your comments defends Google and is spreading doubt. Even causing people to flag legitimate articles like this one.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
p.s. What you said about "every single one" of devrand's comments is far from accurate. It's not ok to haul in someone's comment history as ammunition in an argument, and even worse when what you say is not true.
> Following the publication of this study, Google engineers made it official on a Google Groups posting hours later, announcing a relaxation of the Manifest V3 changes that would have impacted ad blockers.
There is no backtracking or lying here. The thread states:
> there are currently no planned changes to the observational capabilities of webRequest (i.e., anything that does not modify the request).
This was the plan in the earlier thread as well. The API wasn't going away, they were just removing blocking and modifying.
The article also goes hard on how they clarified that "they never intended to prevent or break content blocking". Again, they never said they wanted to limit this, they were just "moving fast and breaking things" by requiring the content blocker extensions to move to a new API. The original thread mentioned uBO because it was going to be the main source of discussion due to it having 50k+ rules already.
This whole scandal was because the DeclarativeNetRequest API was limiting request access. That's the MAIN REASON the uBlock Origin author complained about.