• casmael@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Meh I think they might be overestimating their market position if that’s the strategy

        • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          I think they’re in a better position than Microsoft when they tried to make ActiveX and Silverlight a thing. They own the two most visited websites. On top of that, they own the most used web browser and the most used operating system (judged by web use).

  • SuperSpruce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    7 months ago

    How is this even legal? So now suddenly every chromium extension has to go through a play store style review? How is Google entitled to do this on their competitor’s browsers?

    • b3nj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      They can do it if a competitor has forked Chromium but not bothered to provide their own addon store. For example, Edge supports its own store plus Google, Vivaldi only supports Google

  • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    7 months ago

    I switched to FireFox slightly before all this Adblock-Drama came up. Simply because i realised Chrome was getting ridiculously slow ._.

  • HenriVolney@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    How is it still a problem for anyone? I haven’t used Google in years and I am unexpectedly still alive

      • HenriVolney@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well let’s say they shouldn’t for many reasons, the most obvious being Google’s systematic push at harvesting every last data about your life. In my country, many schools ban chrome from their devices for this very reason

  • Swarfega@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    What happened to the ad blocker detection thing a month ago. Did Google remove it or does uBlock Origin have a permanent workaround now rather than needing to clear cache and reload?

    • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      It’s still an ongoing war, but with Manifest V3, Google will have an advantage over adblockers because they will be in full control over the frequency of extension updates, how many ad blocking rulesets they’ll allow, and perhaps when no one is looking, prevents those rulesets from targeting their own domains. The latter is the nuclear option that’ll instantly piss off the whole tech world if implemented now, but perhaps slow boiled frogs won’t notice it once the heat is high enough.

    • Vent@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Google is disallowing “remote code” in extensions and classifying blocklists (the lists of urls that ad blockers use to know what to block, which are just text files hosted on remote servers like github) as remote code. As a result, any blocklist updates will need to go through the extension review process, which typically takes anywhere from a few hours to a few weeks.

      Google often updates YouTube’s ad delivery on a daily basis. Blocklists must also update as frequently to keep ads blocked on YT. If Google requires that blocklists go through the review process, they can drag their feet and essentially render the ad blockers useless even if they have to allow them to stay in the extension store.