[HN Gopher] Google postpones MV2 shutoff in Chrome stable to Jun... ___________________________________________________________________ Google postpones MV2 shutoff in Chrome stable to June 2023 Author : ghostwords Score : 96 points Date : 2022-09-28 19:21 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (developer.chrome.com) (TXT) w3m dump (developer.chrome.com) | olso wrote: | Great! Proxy extensions live to see another day | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32899846 | mccorrinall wrote: | I never liked chrome because it required me to set a proxy via | command line arguments or system wide. Never understood why | they don't give me an option like firefox within the settings | to set a proxy, but at the same time chrome allowed | *extensions* to set proxies. | jupp0r wrote: | So I was actually trying out uBlock Origin Lite [1] (the MV3 | compatible version) as my daily driver for the past week and I | must say it's not that bad. I had to manually enable content | access for a handful of sites but doing so on an opt-in basis and | getting more performant experience on 98% of other sites is | actually something I'm going to use going forward even if MV2 | compatibility gets pushed further into the future. | | I wonder how long things will stay that way though, when sites | will tailor their tracking/ad annoyances to exploit the MV3 | limitations. I really wouldn't want to opt into every single site | I visit. | | [1] | https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/tag/uBOLite_0.1.2... | LordDragonfang wrote: | It's really validating to see someone post their actual | experience with MV3 adblocking, because the constant stream of | misleading headlines saying "Google is banning adblocking" on | low-expertise places like reddit has become a pet peeve of | mine. Almost no one involved in those discussions actually know | how adblockers work, and are just copying and pasting sub-par | reporting, which itself is just poorly-informed fluff around | attempts to rephrase comments from gorhill. | | MV3 adblockers are still going to, broadly, work fine, if | slightly worse than before. There's slightly more concern over | privacy blockers, but as usual it gets more clicks to mislead | users about something they care about (adblocking) rather than | get them to really care about privacy. | MarkusWandel wrote: | I tried the "lite" Ublock on my work laptop, on the | relatively uninformed opinion that MV3 really is safer than | MV2 in terms of a rogue extension being able to reach in and | steal your secrets (am I wrong?) | | An immediate test with Youtube gave pre-roll ads. Oh well. | But a later Youtube visit, and all since, have been like | Ublock Origin - ads gone, preroll, superimposed and in-video | ad breaks. I have no idea how all this works and frankly am | glad I don't have to. But yes, of course, Youtube may change | in the future to precisely sidestep the MV3 limitations of ad | blockers. | twhb wrote: | Don't mistake this for victory. Google's standard playbook when | forcing things people don't like is to spread the action out over | a longer timeframe, exhausting the media and keeping the final | blow mostly out of the news, and exhausting our individual | outrage and will to keep fighting. It works every time, and it'll | work again if we become complacent again. Until and unless Google | meaningfully commits to _never_ neuter ad blockers, it's still | critical and urgent that we switch to Firefox. | MikeYasnev007 wrote: | lapcat wrote: | The postponement was practically inevitable. Manifest v3 is a | slow moving train wreck. Extension developers know it isn't ready | and won't be ready by January. | | Happy holidays to me, I can kick this can down the road too. | | Look at some of the known issues: | https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/known-issue... | | Userscript managers support | | Estimated timeline: Canary support around October, 2022. | | Service workers are not started in response to webRequest events | | Estimated timeline: Targeting Canary support before October, | 2022. | | No way they were going to be ready to disable v2 in January for | the stable channel. | alooPotato wrote: | Deadline is still January if you want the featured badge or if | you want to work in all the channels of Chrome. Seems like for | most developers the deadline is the same. | ghostwords wrote: | Does having the Featured badge actually change anything | meaningfully for your extension? | alooPotato wrote: | I think its more about not having customers ask why we _don | 't_ have the badge. We primarily have business users so | trust is super important. | metadat wrote: | What is "all the channels of Chrome"? What channels are | there? | nightpool wrote: | They mean nightly and beta builds. | lapcat wrote: | https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/9027636 | | "Chrome browser provides 5 channels: Stable, Extended | stable, Beta, Dev, and Canary." | barkingcat wrote: | very easily googleable - | https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/9027636?hl=en | metadat wrote: | Thanks for the dv punishment check, @Barkingcat. You | could've done a drive-by downvote, but you at least also | left a comment, which I appreciate. | | I was about to hop in the car and didn't have time to | Google it, and pre-cognitvely figured others might also | like to know without needing to also actively search it | 100x, collectively. | | Looking at my comment history, it's clear I frequently do | research things myself and post a thorough comment in an | effort to educate as well as inform others about | terminology in HN discussions. | | Please strive to be generous in your interpretations of | others. | barkingcat wrote: | Please strive to be generous in your interpretation of my | comment as well - likewise. | | There are 3 posters including me replying to your | question re what channels are, 2 including the same link. | Hopefully that answers your question! (and by that I mean | that I hope you didn't interpret that to be me sending | you to a mistaken answer? if that's what you were | refering to?) | | That link is indeed genuinely from google. | davidgerard wrote: | > This change will give Chrome users increased | | ads | jrockway wrote: | MV3 comes from a legitimate concern for user security. Every | time I visit my Mom she has some Chrome extension that steals | all her traffic and reads every page and reports back to some | shady company. It's a huge problem for ordinary users, it's | just that ad blockers legitimately do the same thing as far as | the browser is concerned, so it's a hard balance to strike. If | you do nothing, random people lose key personal information. If | you do something, HN complains about how it's a conspiracy to | make them see more ads. | | As always, it's probably a little from column A and a little | from column B, but mostly column A with the "unfortunate" side | effect of column B. Google has had years to remove ad blockers | from the extension marketplace, for example, and they'd need to | write a lot less code relative to MV3. | | Not building uBlock Origin into Chrome was the mistake they | made here. Once there is a known-good ad-blocker built in, | nobody cares about extensions anymore. (Except for the steal- | your-data extensions, whose authors are definitely amongst us | on HN.) | Siira wrote: | We can't pay the price of your old relative X's laziness. | They don't care about their privacy, their data gets stolen. | Their choice, their tradeoff. | linkgoron wrote: | Google could disable extensions completely and your claim | would still be true. It's clear that MV3 does _not_ _come_ | from a legitimate concern for user security, because Google | could solve security issues without destroying a large part | of the extension ecosystem. | | It might _also_ solve issues with security, but Google 's | complete refusal to work with the community to find common | ground shows what they're really after. | xtacy wrote: | While this is in part a good news, they are still not accepting | MV2 extensions to the Chrome Web Store, even as unlisted/private | extensions. There is no change to that policy: | https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/mv2-sunset/... | panny wrote: | I made my first foray into web extensions with mv3 on chromium | recently. I thought, maybe it's fine since I have nothing to | unlearn. Nope. mv3 is terrible and nothing works. Every example | of something I want to do is in mv2 and doesn't work at all in | mv3. The attempt has killed any desire I have to write a | webextension at all. | pineconewarrior wrote: | The 'switch to firefox' meme-storm and the still-horrible | bugginess of mv3 made this inevitable. | faeriechangling wrote: | The switch to Firefox meme-storm may have ignited but I saw no | actual movement of users to Firefox. | swinglock wrote: | You should switch to Firefox. | cogman10 wrote: | I wonder what sort of hit to their userbase they'll experience | when it finally happens for real. The internet is unbearable | without ad blocking. | staticassertion wrote: | Virtually none, I expect. Especially since "without ad | blocking" isn't on the table, there will continue to be ad | blocking in Chrome. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-09-28 23:00 UTC)