Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near | Hacker News Reader

Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near

theregister.com

20 pointssohkamyung14 comments

I think it is pretty obvious that Chrome isn't a reliable browser. They say manifest v3 is for security and every good lie is hidden in a thin veil of truth. Yes, there are badly behaving plugins and yes there are users that will fail. There always are and they need to be educated about computer usage.

There excuse for the limits of the API is a plain lie and neglect to mention that abusive plugins don't need to use the webrequest API for their intends. They used it because it was powerful but there are hundreds of alternatives spy on passwords, input or personal data in general.

Google tries to implement the same paternalism it pushed through on Android just like Apple did with iOS. This is a reason we don't have good mobile OS. Google is an ad company and their motivation here should be very clear.

"But, but, but, think about the children." I tried to disable instalation of apps on my child's phone. I cannot do this on a locked phone. It seems that i need to unlock it ( how to do it is left to Google search).

I have dropped Chrome for Brave the moment when it started with that yellow highlighting when going from Google search and prevented me to switch it off.

"I choose software based on how good it is, not ideology. Why would I use free software when proprietary is slightly better?"

If only someone had foreseen this...

Stallman is proven right yet again

Without adblockers (and cosmetic, annoyance filtering) my general internet consumption will decrease substantially. We really need some hackers/greybeards to come up with a better non-commercial internet alternative with a pure incentive not based on (CPV, CTR etc).

If someone is working on something like this please reach out I'll donate my time.

You might be interested in Project Gemini: https://gemini.circumlunar.space/

It is gaining momentum, and I'm getting increasingly invested in it.

Gemini is a new internet protocol which: * Is heavier than gopher * Is lighter than the web * Will not replace either * Strives for maximum power to weight ratio * Takes user privacy very seriously

It leans more towards the gopher end of the spectrum than the web. The markup language is dirt simple, basically markdown with headings, links on separate lines, quotes, and preformatted text.

I heard that Mozilla recently received $500m from Google. The resources required to make a modern browser are mind-blowing. Implementing a client for Gemini is a one-man project.

In Gemini, Content Is King (TM)

Mozilla Firefox is the only alternative

I don't think the day is far when websites move away from HTML and simply start rendering all content within a canvas element. They would like the web to be nothing more than a television where they have complete control of content that is consumed by users. I really think we need an alternate web, one that actively eschews capitalist motivations and creates a sort of walled garden of content away from corporate appeal for people without financial incentives, to participate.

No, we don't need an alternative.

It does not matter the very least that big corps also happen to use the same protocol and technology. It is irrelevant if they chose to migrate their entire thing to a canvas.

They are not the Internet, and as long as browsers still support the TCP/IP, HTTP protocols and HTML markup language, they are not the problem.

It's not about the walled gardens, it's not even about the people who live in them, because, the Internet was never for them, they weren't online before TheFaceBook, they don't know, nor care about, nor need to, understand the difference between the google search bar and the browser address bar. Facebook is just a website, youtube is just a website, google is just a website, no different than any other website, what they do is of no consequence to us.

There are lots of browsers, if they don't happen to work with whatever website, visit another website.

The Internet is out there, people have websites, you can have yours too if you want, just go and set it up, and participate, as you're doing right now, on this particular website.

Have a stroll on geekring.net and see for yourself, a tiny tiny selection of what's out there, go out and see that the Internet is in fact not dying.

This is like telling people they can use a balloon if they don't like the changes to the jetliner and that they only fly to Vegas now. I like the jetliner, I like HTML5, the idea of social networks, video, online shopping, source code sharing etc etc. Pointing to some 90s looking personal websites as a proof that the internet is alive and healthy is misleading.

I maybe didn't communicate clearly..

I'm arguing that just because you miss baloon travel, we should make a new airtravel network where jetliners can't exist..

I am saying that there are still baloons and you're free flying them if you want to, and the jetliners have a minimal impact on that.. We can have, and do have, both.. Both baloons and jetliners, and both "new corporate web that is evil for X reason" and small personal pages and everything in between, and that is terrific, and should be encouraged.

What about forking of Chromium? And thank goodness, Firefox is still alive!

a choice between umatrix/origin and chrome, simple decision for me

another misstep by google/abc, following from youtube.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com