deleted by creator
I use Firefox btw
In addition to what was already said - use Firefox instead of anything chromium-based - I think it’s equally important to stop using the services offered by big tech companies and not just try to keep using them on our terms. Google wants me to watch a ton of ads on YouTube? Fine, I’ll stop watching it. In fairness, on my smart TV, YouTube ads have been what I consider adequate, while Twitch can be a disaster. The alternatives already exist with Peertube and Owncast. Are they perfect yet? Far from it probably but there won’t be big improvements if nobody uses it.
Chant it with me, friends!
Stop 👏 using 👏 Chrome 👏!!
Switching to Firefox is really not needed at all to evade this one. Just switch to a different Chromium browser than Chrome itself, then use your browser’s own extension store.
I use Edge, my adblocker is in Edge’s extension store. If Google is throttling updates to my adblocker to help in their fight on adblockers, I can just install the one from the Edge Addons store and that problem is solved. I’m sure other Chromium browsers have their own extension store too.
Why do you expect that Edge wouldn’t adopt Google-like MV3 along with Chrome?
Microsoft adopted Chromium in order to minimise development costs in a product it doesn’t see as core, something which would be incurred if it had to maintain its own fork of mv3, and is incentivized through Bing to pursue a similar approach.
I’m talking about what’s in the title only, Google slowing down extension updates.
There’s no problem with MV3. My adblocker already claims the user experience won’t be impacted.
The main issue is that block list updates will have to be delivered via extension updates, which means the extension store provider is in control of how fast the block lists can be updated. So adblockers trying to keep up with Youtube might get slowed down by Google.
My point is that can easily be solved by just not using Google’s extension store. Microsoft has no reason to slow down Youtube adblocking updates for example.Of course, Microsoft still discontinues MV3 too. But that’s not my problem at all, and also not the one in the title here.
I’m waiting to see Youtube block me using Vivaldi w/uBlock Origin on Linux so far. It hasn’t happened, am I accidentally doing something awesome to evade their traps so far?
Vivaldi’s Chrome-based, so I would presume the same tricks to detect uBlock Origin on Chrome itself would work, or is Vivaldi doing something sneaky?
I have no problem jumping to Firefox the moment they do it – I just haven’t had an issue yet. I should add I’m in Canada, perhaps that is a factor.
In-built adblockers aren’t going to be affected by MV3 anyway. They are not extensions, thus Google is powerless there.
That’s cool, but YouTube detects Vivaldi’s built in adblocker, so it’s kinda irrelevant if it’s affected by extension policies.
To use YT in Vivaldi, you have to properly configure uBlock Origin (avoid extra filters that interfere with YT) and disable the builtin adblock for YT. And given that Vivaldi relies on Chrome Extension Store for its extensions, there will still be some friction to getting Mv2 extensions after Google pulls the plug on them.
OP has literally said that YT didn’t block them/didnt show any ads while using Vivaldi… As far I’m concerned, I couldn’t care less. I don’t use YT at all.
Vivaldi user here. So far, I’ve had zero problems accessing YouTube.
It hasn’t happened, am I accidentally doing something awesome to evade their traps so far?
Probably A/B testing.
I’m using Adblock Plus on Edge and have the same experience like you. No reaction from Youtube yet to my adblocker.
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
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.
Saved 80% of original text.
I don’t know so much about this, but it’s funny to see all this while Apple lets me set an ad blocker in iOS settings.
iOS is already very similar to what Google is trying to implement here, although extension rulesets in iOS can be updated out of band.
iOS 17 has a documented limit of 150k rules, half of what is often required for a comprehensive content blocker, and presently has a “bug” that limits is to 30k to 40k rules at most.
Oh no…
