There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

MagicShel ,

I’m warning Google that Google Chrome may soon be disabled on my devices.

wazzupdog ,

It already is on mine, no trace of chromium or it’s forks.

nexussapphire ,

Discord, slack, bitwarden, steam, Microsoft teams, visual studio code, balena etcher . Anyone else know of any electron apps or heavily modified version of chrome?😄

qupada ,

Teams has switched to Microsoft's own edition of the same concept, "Edge WebView2". Now that Edge is just being Chrome wearing a rubber Scooby Doo mask, I don't expect the differences are vast.

Another fun iteration is Plex's desktop client, which uses QtWebEngine... however surprise! still the Chromium engine underneath.

Signal's desktop app is plain old Electron though.

Of the ones on your list, worth noting that Discord and Slack work fine with FirefoxPWA.

felixwhynot ,
@felixwhynot@lemmy.world avatar

Holy shit I had not heard of Firefox PWA but I will use the shit out of this

KLISHDFSDF ,
@KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml avatar

I use the shit out of Firefox PWA. I just wish Mozilla would get off their asses and make it work out of the box vs having to install a third party app.

nexussapphire ,

I do wish there were more native apps but alternatives to electron is always a good thing in my book.

Except for Microsoft, Microsoft can stop pretending their solution is demonstrably different from electron and chromium.

sinceasdf ,

Discord bitwarden steam and teams all work fine for me in ff, i don’t use the others

dubyakay ,

github.com/gamingdoom/datcord

Works like a charm.

nexussapphire ,

Neat!

can ,

Until you do more than warn they don’t care.

Beaver ,
@Beaver@lemmy.ca avatar

Linux Phones and Degoogled Phones surge in response.

OpenStars ,
@OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

Unfortunately for work I may have no choice:-(. Several of our daily work products I’ve tried on Firefox without success. Those also don’t have ads.

I wish there were better alternatives. I may try out LibreWolf but I could not imagine it somehow being easier, though with enough effort put in the end result may be all that matters. Until the first update (possibly forced on the server end even if I don’t on mine) that breaks everything and I cannot do my work for the day, in which case I will absolutely go crawling back to Chrome, bc they have us by the short hairs there.:-(

MagicShel ,

I went through the same thing with MSIE. Corporate mandates and stuff. Businesses are sometimes wrong.

OpenStars ,
@OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

No, they are always right! (^Especially^ ^when^ ^they^ ^are^ ^wrong…^)

CosmicTurtle0 ,

My company just plain old won’t install Firefox without a good reason.

I’m stuck using chrome or edge. Once the ad block stops working on chrome, I move over.

_pete_ ,

I really hate the corporate IT.

I was at a job that was slowly transitioning from a medium sized company to a larger one, initially we were allowed just install and use whatever on our machines, but gradually IT started implementing policies where if we wanted to add something it had to go through a request system and usually it would be denied.

As a software developer this was just infuriating, it would hold up work, force us to use shitty software (like Chrome and Edge) and there would often be fuck ups where installing a new version of software would require removal of the old one and installation of a new one - which would trigger the approval process again.

Like - I get it - some people can’t be trusted, but we were some of the key devs for the companies product, we know what we’re doing.

I was rather happy to leave that part of the company behind when I left.

OpenStars ,
@OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

Yeesh… I would reconsider working there if possible, but being able to (checks notes) pay rent and afford food and medical care may just make up for it.:-| Hopefully you don’t need to surf the web much at work.

tal ,
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

My company just plain old won’t install Firefox without a good reason.

If you have other potential employers in mind, the IT environment at your current employer and other potential employers is maybe one factor to keep in mind in making decisions as to where to work.

There are some IT policies that are no-gos for me at potential employers. I ask during the interview process.

Matth78 ,

On my work computer I don’t have admin rights but still I could install Firefox with no problems. It installed itself for local user only.

friend_of_satan ,

Use chrome only where you need it.

OpenStars ,
@OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

Prexactly:-)

ColeSloth ,

What pisses me off is how many websites don’t work right with Firefox now. There’s been several times where I’ve had issues with a site functioning on Firefox and had to switch to a chromium browser.

GregorGizeh ,

I read that most sites work just fine if you spoof your user agent to windows and standard chrome

InternetUser2012 ,

That’s what I do and I haven’t had a problem since.

AeroLemming ,

I’ve had some sites bug out on Firefox that I’m pretty sure weren’t really related to Google or Microsoft in any way. I still use Firefox obviously, but it’s annoying.

GregorGizeh ,

The point was that some sites neglect to develop for Firefox, and simply tell Firefox users to get chrome instead. Meanwhile Firefox works in most cases perfectly fine without any doing on the website’s part if it is simply duped into believing that the firefox user is just a plain old chrome user as expected. Doesn’t work for everything, but almost.

AeroLemming ,

Oh yeah, I hate sites that do that.

ayaya ,
@ayaya@lemdro.id avatar

This breaks any site that uses CloudFlare’s Turnstile for me. It will loop forever and never let me through if my user agent is set to Chrome.

noxy ,
@noxy@yiffit.net avatar

Such as?

calamityjanitor ,

The only problem I run into is sites that use Bluetooth or USB APIs to talk to a local device. Both Firefox and Safari don’t implement them due to security concerns.

noxy ,
@noxy@yiffit.net avatar

Ohh yeah, VIA for QMK keyboards is guilty of that shit

ColeSloth ,

T mobiles website is the most recent I had issues with. Navigating to certain pages within t mobiles site would cause “something went wrong” or just a redirect loop.

Supervisor194 ,
@Supervisor194@lemmy.world avatar

This happens very rarely, but it does happen from time to time. When a website starts acting weird out of nowhere I keep a copy of Chrome installed just for that use and then promptly return to Firefox.

gsfraley ,

My insurance site (MyCigna) started working a couple months ago, but for years it failed to log in. It’s those types of contracted apps that seem to fail the most for me, like apps you’d see on a company intranet.

TrickDacy ,
@TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

I didn’t ever have trouble with that site and always used it in ff

SynonymousStoat ,

I only have Chrome installed for the rare occasion where a site doesn’t work in Firefox. I feel like we’ve gone a bit backwards as of lately in building websites that are browser agnostic.

Caesium ,

I have a friend who sends me tiktoks that refuse to load with firefox on my phone. I consider it a blessing

Feyd ,

Libredirect extension will redirect to public proxitok instances so you could watch them without going to tiktoks site directly

KillingTimeItself ,

proxitok is such a good name holy shit

drspod ,

I see this FUD all the time but nobody ever gives examples. Can you point to some specific sites that don’t work with Firefox?

Dsklnsadog ,
@Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

It happens to me with some payments stores. Always need to go back to chromium based pos browser

Stoney_Logica1 ,

Costco Travel login page never loads for me in Firefox. Specific sites my kids use for school don’t work either. I wouldn’t say it happens regularly, but often enough to be annoying.

KillingTimeItself ,

dialog boxes will just fuck off. I’ve never gotten webRTC to work properly, though that might be configuration skill issues, and or webRTC implementation skill issues, since it seems to only work on browser, not across two different ones.

I’ve seen sites just load asinine layouts, borked kerning, completely fucked text handling. Just goofy shit.

In some cases i’ve seen sites have no download buttons on firefox. I don’t know why, it’s confused me a few times though.

lapping6596 ,

I have issues with twitch. Given I only watch every 3 months for the POE announcement live stream, I just open brave for that one site. I have not tried to figure out if it’s my setup or not

noodlejetski , (edited )

I’ve been watching Twitch on Firefox for years without an issue, so it’s very likely that the problem is on your end.

ArgentRaven ,

Walmart.com didn’t work for me on FF for about a week, and it did work on edge and chrome (still broken on FF when I disabled all my add ons). However, they fixed it and it works now. I think it was just a problem with the build of the website, and wasn’t intentional because it definitely works now.

I think that’s what’s more likely - temp problems that could affect any browser until their web dev fixes it. Not anything malicious like intentionally blocking a browser.

And then, it’s just Walmart. It’s nothing that really mattered.

MagicShel ,

Something I’ve been on recently. Microsoft Teams maybe?

GustavoFring ,

TradingView

asap ,
@asap@lemmy.world avatar

I use this every day with Firefox and Librefox with no issues.

ColeSloth ,

T-mobile would be the last specific one. I couldn’t navigate to certain pages within to make plan adjustments.

PopOfAfrica ,

Apple Podcasts for me

CarbonatedPastaSauce ,

It’s not FUD but there’s usually more to it than just “Firefox”. Usually has something to do with security plugins. There are sites that do not work properly with Ublock or Noscript installed, even when you turn them off for the site. I’ve experienced it many, many times. It happens to me most often ordering food, because a lot of local restaurants sites are janky as fuck, but I’ve also had issues with more well known sites. Southwest airlines has been problematic for a couple years now. My credit union also had issues with parts of their online banking app, but that thankfully got fixed after a year or two.

TL;DR - it’s a real thing.

Restaldt ,

Microsoft teams

Pizza hut

Most of my utilities online sites

Mubelotix ,
@Mubelotix@jlai.lu avatar

Dev tools were borked on FF for me. Entire tab was blank

diffusive ,

Duolingo

kurap1ka ,

Bambulab store

AWittyUsername ,

The payment provider my local council uses doesn’t work on Firefox, or Safari. I have to use shitty chrome on my phone. I refuse to install it on my computer.

Scrollone ,

Report it on webcompat.com

kill_dash_nine ,

I was worried about this when I originally switched from Chrome to Firefox earlier this year but I can honestly say I haven’t found a single site that I personally use that I had to go back to Chrome for. Any issues I had with any site were related to ad blocking using uBlock or DNS based blocking I also do.

zelnix ,

Start page

beejjorgensen ,
@beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

The local Uber eats clone here has the submit order button off screen. Reuters on Android sometimes has the top bar of the webpage shift down over the content. A video conferencing site used by my medical provider won’t connect the video. The 3rd party comment section on our local news site sometimes lays out the controls off screen. The Lemmy PWA on Android used to crash on startup (recently fixed yay!!)

FF is my daily driver and 99% of things work fine, but I’ve definitely found a few sites where they clearly didn’t test it. I still have Chrome installed for those rare occasions I need it.

And I don’t even necessarily blame Firefox for this. I used to do web dev back in the day and I remember making my shit work across multiple browsers. Maybe Firefox is doing it right and Chrome is doing it wrong, but everybody targeted Chrome because it has a zillion percent of the market.

SynonymousStoat ,

Firefox has been, and still is, my primary browser since before Chrome even existed so, definitely not FUD. Also, it’s generally not Firefox’s fault either, but instead the developers of websites that don’t work in Firefox are usually doing something that isn’t standards compliant.

First to come to mind is that I can’t log into the account management part of the pet boarding company I use when in Firefox. Another scenario is that a lot of movie streaming sites won’t give Firefox video higher than 720p so in that case, Edge is often the only browser that can receive 1080p video. From my understanding the movie studios are the ones to blame for this.

nullpotential ,
@nullpotential@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

I use firefox and keep Chrome on my PC for this reason. Off the top of my head:

I can’t use Siyuan correctly, my main editor, in Firefox. It only registers the initial backspace key press.

I do telehealth, and the voice/video will not work in firefox no matter what I try.

Live-reloading for Ruby on Rails projects doesn’t seem to work on firefox.

DeadNinja ,
@DeadNinja@lemmy.world avatar

I just read about this extension today. Seems interesting. The description says It’s supposedly doing more than just switching the UA.

addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/…/chrome-mask/

mryessir ,

Does this happen in you work environment or on your private managed system? I raise this question because I started to realize that governing firefox apparently is a hard task. Never did I experience a faulty site on my private desktop devices but on my work stations. Im currently running firefox 115.13.0esr.

ColeSloth ,

My home system. I’m not doing any extra security on it, either.

mryessir ,

You shouldn’t be required to do so. You also neglected my presumption. Thank you for replying.

danafest ,

I was recently trying to add tickets from ticketbastard to Google wallet to be able to use them offline. I have chrome disabled on my phone. Surprise surprise it doesn’t work with any other browser except chrome. The ticketbastard app just throws an error and nothing happens. Took me a lot of searching to realize it was because chrome was disabled.

viking ,
@viking@infosec.pub avatar

Firefox my beloved.

chemicalwonka ,
@chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

1000023325

rtxn ,

Librewolf, my beloved.

chemicalwonka ,
@chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

❤

Lost_My_Mind ,

This is the first I’ve heard of LibreWolf. Is it compatible with Windows 7? And also, why is it good?

can , (edited )

Looks like it should run on Windows.

Edit: sorry, didn’t read far down enough. It’s only built for Windows 10, but they recommend this?

a_wild_mimic_appears ,

Main features: … Continued support for NPAPI plugins like Silverlight, Adobe Flash and Java

Picture this in your minds eye: a Windows 7 machine running a browser with still working Flash and Java plugins, connected to the internet in 2024.

what do you see?

i see a flourishing ecosystem of worms, viruses and rootkits, all trying to be the one species to get to be the one who does the most damage to the prey species, the common user.

can ,

Sounds like an interesting experience to me. Admittedly I hadn’t looked that far into it. If Win 7 is a must I’d say just go with latest Firefox.

ivn ,

You really shouldn’t connect windows 7 to the internet.

jrgd ,

librewolf.net

A summary from its site and known technical details:

  • no telemetry by default
  • includes uBlock Origin
  • has sane privacy-respecting defaults
  • prepackages arkenfox user.js
  • relatively well-maintained fork of Firefox that keeps up with upstream
  • No major controversies AFAIK

As for Windows 7, nobody should really need to install Librewolf anyway on such a device. No device running Windows 7 should have access to the internet at this point. If you are asking about compatibility intending this use case, you have bigger problems to worry about than your choice of browser. If you just need to view HTML files graphically, even Internet Explorer or an older firefox ESR will do.

Empricorn ,

You’re overreacting. Firefox knows their users. I am a huge “stan” for Firefox, but I will delete it like a time traveller if they make it impossible to ignore ads. I will salt the earth and poop on Firefox’s grave and actively avoid it everywhere… However. If I’m wrong, there will be a Next Thing…

TerkErJerbs ,

If you use a DNS solutions you can block all the telemetry shit. Frankly FF has been phoning home in a lot of undesirable ways for many years even before this, like most browsers.

chemicalwonka ,
@chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

Firefox is no longer an adversary to Google for the browser market, if it ever was. FF has become a vassal of Google that with its tyranny is dictating the course of the internet, such as WEI that as far as I know it was abandoned at least for now.

TerkErJerbs ,

Yeah I know. blog.windscribe.com/windscribe-expose-mozilla/

chemicalwonka ,
@chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

🧐

dohpaz42 ,
@dohpaz42@lemmy.world avatar

Not entirely true.

viking ,
@viking@infosec.pub avatar

Yeah I’m using Fennec, which doesn’t have that. But as long as it’s a flick of a switch to disable, I don’t really mind. Still a million times better than manifest v3.

pwalker ,

At least link the full article and not just the headline… smh. Here is also the follow-up article with comments from Firefox’s CTO. heise.de/…/Firefox-defends-itself-Everything-done…

Imgonnatrythis ,

Saying this about any corporation’s product is guaranteed not to age well.

Lost_My_Mind ,

Mmm mmm mmm, Bill Cosby tells me to love my puddin’ pops!

…i feel sleepy…

Chozo , (edited )

Yeah, it's strange just how readily the blinders go up wherever Mozilla is concerned. They're a corp, just like any other; if they had the money and leverage, they'd be just as aggressive as Google. Have people already forgotten that time they laid off 200+ employees and then gave all the execs bonuses?

E: Apparently y'all have forgotten. In 2021, Mozilla laid off a few hundred employees. CEO's salary doubled that year. Fuck Mozilla, they're no more your friends than Google or Microsoft; they're the same evil, just smaller-scaled evil, is all.

snooggums ,
@snooggums@midwest.social avatar

But they haven’t threatened to undercut ad blocking yet, so as a comparison they are better.

Imgonnatrythis ,

Absolutely, but Mozilla is pretty much owned by Google anyway, and falling in love with these companies as wide eyed fanboys never looks good when they eventually turn.

OpenStars ,
@OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

I wouldn’t say “owned”, but the rest… yeah:-(

Imgonnatrythis ,

Who provides the majority of their funding?

Sordid ,
@Sordid@lemmy.world avatar

It’s okay to like them while they do good and then change your mind when they turn evil.

timewarp ,
@timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

You forgot to also mention that they are a cult where you get attacked if you say anything negative about Mozilla.

TrickDacy ,
@TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

You forgot to not shill for an actual corporation

timewarp ,
@timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

I’m not shilling for anyone. If you want to discuss actual technical details I’m happy to do so. If you’re here just to share your feelings absent facts then I don’t care what you have to say.

TrickDacy ,
@TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

“this is way safer for users” may as well be feelings. It’s not backed up by anything but a clear boner for Google

timewarp ,
@timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

It is literally explained in the first part of the uBOL GitHub page:

github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home#description

It’s like you haven’t even done the most basic research that anyone with anything useful to say would do. Why?

beejjorgensen ,
@beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

Looking around, I don’t think that’s true. Lots of bad things are freely said about Mozilla and the people running it.

parpol ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    pivot_root ,

    Chromium (Google Chrome’s base) is also open source.

    And yet, we’re still at a corporation’s mercy as to whether everything Chromium-based gets ruined by Google’s fuck-what-the-users-want policies. Like with Manifest V3. And JXL support. And extensions on mobile.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Users do want MV3. The people complaining about it are in the minority.

    Quill7513 ,

    Why the hell would a user want MV3?

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Because it makes a majority of users that use Chrome much safer. Do you do any basic research? Do you need me to point you to the getting started guide?

    Quill7513 ,

    It doesn’t though. An adblocker is your VERY most important tool in a good security posture. Googles playing any users who ask for MV3 for fools

    Jarix ,

    The average user is and always will be an ignorant and careless user. And they are the majority. As in over 50%

    halcyoncmdr ,
    @halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world avatar

    Users don’t know what the fuck Manifest is period. They just click the internet button. And for the longest time that meant the E with a loop around it. Now that means the multicolored circle.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Users know that they want more security. MV3 makes a major of users that use Chrome safer from malicious extensions.

    halcyoncmdr ,
    @halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world avatar

    I get what you’re saying, but the average person has no idea what it is, why they should care, or anything about it. All they see is Google making their extensions stop working. And when that includes some of the most popular extensions, that directly affect Googles revenue, they’re going to think that’s the reason.

    The overwhelming majority of users get their extensions from the Chrome Web Store… Which Google has full control over. Users expect them to be blocking almost all malicious extensions before they’re even available to download.

    z3rOR0ne , (edited )

    This. Google is pushing MV3 to single out and neuter the more robust and customizable ad blockers, like uBO. They’re trying to appease their advertising investors by force feeding ads to you and they’re plugging the leaks/workarounds savvy developers have created to block them.

    If Firefox ever gets popular enough, what do you wanna bet money bags Google, their primary monetary contributor, will put a condition on the next round of funding that they stop support for MV2?

    Stay small and crazy customizable Firefox.

    umbrella ,
    @umbrella@lemmy.ml avatar

    the minority of people complaining about it are the only ones who know what it even is

    parpol ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    AWittyUsername ,

    Except now you have to maintain a branch that’s missing everything after that release upstream.

    parpol ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    AWittyUsername ,

    Yeah you can probably do periodic merge or rebase etc. But then you have the fun of merge conflicts

    AWittyUsername ,

    So is Android. So is Chromium. So is React, and Flutter. So is Java.

    Open source doesn’t mean FOSS.

    bamboo ,

    Open source does mean FOSS. It doesn’t mean community-oriented.

    AWittyUsername ,

    No it doesn’t. Different licenses dictate what you can and can’t do with open source software. Some are more restrictive than others. Open source simply means that the source code is freely available.

    bamboo ,

    It absolutely does. Open source is not simply source-available, it means that it follows the open source definition. opensource.org/osd

    Boozilla ,
    @Boozilla@lemmy.world avatar

    I’m grateful for FF, but they also annoy me at times. Just little stuff probably not worth bitching about in detail. But also a peek at the potential for problems that you’re talking about.

    So of course I’ll bitch about it.

    I call it the “stop whatever you think you’d rather do right now and pay attention to our product” type shit.

    Imagine you have a combination wrench and whenever you take it out of the toolbox it starts yammering at you about how great of a wrench it is and all if its shiny features. Fucking ridiculous, right?

    So why do we tolerate software that does that?

    Way too much software does this pushy shit. Just stay outta my face and do your actual job, software.

    Blaster_M ,

    Because people have the attention span of a goldfish and if you aren’t reminding them every 5 seconds of the features they have available they’ll forget they do in fact use them and then complain to support because they can’t spend 5 seconds on the help page.

    I say this, not in defense of mozilla, but in frustration at having to deal daily with these kinds of issues. You can put giant screen-size arrows on where to go / what single “do the thing” button to press and people will still forget 5 seconds later.

    Boozilla ,
    @Boozilla@lemmy.world avatar

    Good point. That’s true, there is definitely that side of it. I think what you’re talking about is less obnoxious than the stuff that feels forced and make-the-boss-happy promotional. Push notifcations for no reason, etc. It’s a spectrum from necessary to uneccessary, and there’s too much of the latter IMO.

    Quill7513 ,

    We’re so fucking used to ads we don’t even always realize we’re getting pushed propaganda

    viking ,
    @viking@infosec.pub avatar

    Firefox is a foundation, not a corporation. And I’m already using Fennec instead of the official release.

    Imgonnatrythis ,

    No. Firefox is a product. Mozilla is a corporation AND a foundation.

    en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation

    JohnDClay ,

    Anyone else been having issues of not being able to load YouTube videos past the first few seconds on Firefox using ublock? I couldn’t find any recent information online. I don’t know if this is part of the war on ad blockers, or unrelated.

    snooggums ,
    @snooggums@midwest.social avatar

    I watched several videos today on Firefox with ublock origin and no issues. Haven’t run into issues with ads yet.

    errorlab ,

    Yeah, yesterday. I just kept refreshing. FF + unlock + not signed in, seems to trigger it

    viking ,
    @viking@infosec.pub avatar

    It’s been a side effect of the server side ads apparently, but reloading the page fixes it for me.

    TrickDacy ,
    @TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

    Haven’t had that issue, nope

    Matriks404 ,

    Besides the fact that Mozilla sucks, Firefox is an amazing piece of software. It’s PITA that it’s about to be enshittified.

    cupcakezealot ,
    @cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    meanwhile firefox lists it as recommended and also lets you use it on firefox mobile.

    LostXOR ,

    Almost as if a browser company that's not also an advertising company has no reason to fight ad blockers.

    hollyberries ,

    I’ve got some bad news for you. Mozilla bought an ad company.

    DragonTypeWyvern ,

    And my nerd bros try to get me to donate

    endofline ,

    You can always fork firefox. People used to use website not requiring javascript at all and it worked well. Some people still use even w3m f.e. when graphics card driver goes bad after update and they need to watch some docs on the internet. Most current browser have most features you would ever need

    SpaceCadet ,
    @SpaceCadet@feddit.nl avatar

    You can always fork firefox

    You could fork Chromium too.

    hollyberries ,

    Forking is indeed the way forward when Mozilla loses its way a little more. For myself, I switched to Librewolf about 6 months ago, along with replacing Thunderbird with Betterbird after using it since the Phoenix days.

    I cannot remember what prompted the move to Librewolf, it may have been the AI stuff they were pushing at the time, or possibly the update that forced the tabs into my titlebar without having to go into about:config to fix it. Or the fact that Firefox was constantly pushing me to sign up for an account. There were quite a few gripes that added up over time lol

    Betterbird restored some removed things I liked pre-supernova as well as a native systray icon under Linux and that was enough motivation to make the switch.

    It is time for a new browser to enter the market. Either Ladybird or something built with Servo seems likely.

    cupcakezealot , (edited )
    @cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    i mean they bought a privacy preserving ad company to offer an alternative for companies to google, which is what they should be doing.

    because like it or not people depend on ads for their sites.

    NostraDavid ,
    @NostraDavid@programming.dev avatar

    Wait until people find out you can make the government ban ads - euronews.com/…/grenoble-europe-s-first-ad-free-ci…

    I like their future (so far).

    Railcar8095 ,

    Ban billboards. Very different. And are there ones owned by the city.

    Honestly, not a huge win.

    danafest ,

    Banning billboards is actually pretty huge. I live in Maine where billboards are banned and the mental break from being constantly forcibly advertised to is so nice. Every time I travel anywhere else I realize what a huge difference it makes.

    x00z ,
    @x00z@lemmy.world avatar

    Sadly that news isn’t how it is right now. Picking a random spot in Grenoble using Google maps and searching for the first tram station, I find 6+ billboards.

    Blackmist ,

    It has made mobile browsing usable again for me.

    jo3shmoo ,

    Same. Firefox Mobile had been a laggy mess when I used it a few years ago, but a combination of some really aggressive advertising and the announcement of manifest v3 caused me to give it another shot about a year ago. It’s a dramatic improvement in phone browsing.

    TheTimeKnife ,
    @TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world avatar

    Google needs to be broken up by government.

    ArugulaZ ,

    It saddens me to agree with this. Who knew Google would become as oppressive as fucking MICROSOFT?

    tahoe , (edited )

    « Don’t be evil »

    😬😬😬😬

    Zacryon ,
    @Zacryon@feddit.org avatar

    They ditched that in 2018. It was long overdue. At least somewhat honest about themselves.

    Grandwolf319 ,

    Most smart people who understood capitalism did.

    NekkoDroid ,
    @NekkoDroid@programming.dev avatar

    It really wouldn’t change anything in the long run. Any company that creates a browser is gonna need some form of income and people aren’t willing to pay for a browser. What would be their incentive to continue to work on the browser when they aren’t being paid?

    humorlessrepost ,

    Same as Firefox. Let search engines (including google) pay them a fair market rate to make them the default browser.

    voluble ,

    I hear the term ‘broken up’ a lot in media and discourse, but it’s never explained. In your eyes, what actually happens when a government ‘breaks up’ a corporation? I mean, what are the steps, objectives, and outcomes?

    Not being adversarial, I’m just curious.

    boatswain ,

    Not the person you’re asking, but my general understanding is that different products would be required to be their own companies, so advertising, Android, and Chrome would all be separate businesses.

    Verat ,

    I envision it like AT&T’s break-up, where the singular Google is broken up into regional companies that will (hopefully) have to compete with each other.

    ArchRecord ,

    Adblockers are the largest .

    Google isn’t just disabling an extension, they’re attacking a boycott comprised of 200,000,000+ people, all around the globe, standing up to forced manipulation of our beliefs and habits by profit-hungry corporations.

    irreticent ,
    @irreticent@lemmy.world avatar

    I never thought about it that way. Interesting. Thanks!

    Ragnarok314159 ,

    If Google presented me with ads for things I might be interested in and in a non-invasive way, wouldn’t mind looking at them at all.

    Instead I get ads for the seemingly random shit I have absolutely zero interest in buying. How they are consistently wrong about my spending habits is unbelievable. I have two fucking hobbies! I don’t see ads for anything relating to them. Ever.

    pete_the_cat ,

    Also, there’s like 10 per webpage, and then you have the damn pop-ups when you scroll 🤬

    madcaesar ,

    Ad blockers block more than just shitty ads. They also block malicious ads.

    theoretiker ,

    Sounds like you need to give Google more private information

    itsnotits ,

    a boycott comprising* 200,000,000+ people

    TCB13 ,
    @TCB13@lemmy.world avatar

    You’re correct, and now people will boycott Chrome. Firefox and Brave are good / accessible / easy to get for most people so…

    VantaBrandon ,

    IT guys will stop using it…

    Which means they’ll stop deploying it as the default browser on some large enterprises, it won’t ship as defaults in pre-baked images going forward.

    Average joes and janes will use Safari and Edge depending on OS.

    Where is their growth going to come from after this change? Chromebooks? lol.

    I hope they do it, it will hurt them in the long run.

    You can bet 300 new uBlock replacements to spring up practically overnight, some of them scams, reducing trust in the Google ecostystem.

    unrelatedkeg ,

    You can bet 300 new uBlock replacements to spring up practically overnight, some of them scams, reducing trust in the Google ecostystem.

    Unfortunately it’s a bigger problem.

    Google doesn’t plan to block uBlock Origin itself, but the APIs it uses to integrate into Chrome in order to function. This will effectively disable all adblockers on Chrome. uBlock won’t be removed from the Chrome extension store, it will just have 90% of its functionality removed.

    Additionally, this isn’t a Chrome-only change, but a change in the open source Chromium, an upstream browser of Chrome all other Chrome-based browsers use (essentially everything aside from Firefox and Safari themselves).

    The change itself is involved in changing the browser’s “Manifest”, a list of allowed API calls for extensions. The current one is called Manifest v2 and the new one was dubbed Manifest v3.

    Theorethically Chromium-based browsers could “backport” Manifest v2 due to the open source nature of Chromium. However that is unlikely as it’s projected to take a lot of resources to change, due mostly to security implications of the change.

    Vendors of other Chromium-based browsers themselves have little to gain from making the change aside from name recognition for “allowing uBlock”, which most users either wouldn’t care for or already use Firefox, so the loss for Google isn’t projected to be large, just as the gains for other vendors.

    TLDR: uBlock won’t be removed from the Chrome extension store, but the mechanisms through which it blocks ads will be blocked. The block isn’t a change in Chrome but in Chromium and affects all Chromium-based brosers (all except Firefox and Safari). Other vendors could change that to allow adblockers but it’s projected to take a lot of time and resources.

    erwan ,

    There is already a “lite” version of uBlock origin that conforms to the new manifest and will still work.

    There are still a few features missing, some can’t be implemented but others will be.

    Railing5132 ,

    Is it by the same author? Nik Rols, iirc?

    Plopp ,

    Raymond Hill (gorhill) is the author of uBlock Origin, uBlock Origin Lite, uMatrix etc.

    Railing5132 ,

    I remembered… poorly.

    axum ,

    The ‘block element’ picker is the big one that can not be implemented in the lite version.

    Also included block lists can’t update unless the extension itself updates.

    ipkpjersi ,

    Those seem like really big hurdles. How can those be worked around?

    Is it not possible to trigger a manual block list update?

    axum ,

    It’s not something that can be worked around. It’s specifically a design feature of manifest v3 to restrict these types of things.

    Your options are to accept this or use a different browser.

    cmhe ,

    IT guys will stop using it…

    No, they will not, if they didn’t already. Because convenience it key.

    The browser war is over, and humans lost, corporations won. Google and other huge corporations control the biggest websites and most of the access to content on the internet.

    They just need to make it inconvenient to use ad-blocking browsers.

    They built their business on advertiser gambling, which seem to be flawed concept, because they keep on squeezing that tube for every penny more and more, in a race to the bottom.

    But they are still in control of both browers and content so they have options to keep squeezing more.

    So you want to use a ad blocker? Well, the browser that supports them might not be white listed (anymore) by the bot detector, and you have to solve captchas on every site you visit, until you come to your senses and use a browser, where ad blocking is no longer possible.

    Oh, and all that is ok, because of “security”. Because letting the users be in control of their devices and applications is “in-secure”. They are just doing that to protect you from spam and scams, just trust them! Trust them, because they don’t trust you!

    LainTrain ,

    You’re absolutely right.

    That said at least I’ll take this as my cue to peace out of the mainstream web and only use Links2.

    Railing5132 ,

    I’m looking into the possibility of moving my organization to FF. Office of about 200 endpoints. The sticky wicket that I don’t fully understand is Auth passthru to 365.

    TdotMatrix ,

    Does this help at all: support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/windows-sso

    WhyFlip ,

    “IT guys”? Chrome has a 66% market share globally.

    VantaBrandon ,

    Its not the IT guys themselves, its the aggregate influence. One large school campus flips the switch to Firefox on their next image deployment its a drop in a bucket, but when 1000 schools, 2000 government agencies and 5000 businesses all suddenly stop using Chrome the graph starts to move, because laypeople just accept the default.

    IT guys are like browser-influencers, they tell their parents what to use, friends, and so on. We all used to recommend Chrome, I don’t anymore.

    ChonkaLoo ,
    @ChonkaLoo@lemmy.world avatar

    Thank you Google I hope shitty moves like this drives enough people away to better browsers like Firefox. It desperately needs a bigger market share.

    Plopp ,

    Not only a bigger market share. What’s keeping Firefox alive is the financial support they get from Google. If enough people move from Chrome to Firefox without Firefox also securing finances from elsewhere, Google could easily kill Firefox by just not giving them money and we’d all be left with just Chromium.

    lemmyhavesome ,

    I think the real reason Google is funding Firefox is because they’re afraid of being targeted in antitrust lawsuits. As long as Firefox is around, they have someone they can point to, to say they’re not a monopoly.

    SaharaMaleikuhm ,

    This 100%. You could maybe argue that Safari exists, but that is Apple exclusive I think, so it would probably not work as an argument.

    FartsWithAnAccent ,
    @FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io avatar

    So, what they're saying is: Chrome will have severely decreased functionality and users will no longer be able to protect themselves from sketchy ads that contain scams, malware, and other nefarious bullshit (often hosted on Google's own ad networks)?

    OpenStars ,
    @OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

    What are you expecting, a corp to… ah… uh… not be evil, or something? :-P

    Quexotic ,

    Thank you very much for summoning Jeff Goldblum’s voice into my head.

    OpenStars ,
    @OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

    I… uh, found a way:-D.

    tibi ,

    Google is primarily an ad company

    OpenStars ,
    @OpenStars@discuss.online avatar

    It did not always used to be this way, though it was always headed here.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Users can still use ad blockers. Users will be safer from malicious extensions sending all your web traffic to an untrusted party.

    TrickDacy ,
    @TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

    Nope

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Yep. Facts.

    FartsWithAnAccent ,
    @FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io avatar

    You seem to be struggling with the term "facts"

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Is your feelings facts to you? Which fact specifically am I struggling with? Do you have anything concrete to say at all or are you just going to keep being vague because of feelings?

    southsamurai ,
    @southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

    Whew, kinda weird to find a Google employee on lemmy. I would have thought there were rules against that in the would employee handbook.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    I don’t work for Google. Are you in a cult or an anti-opensource PR firm? Why would that be your first instinct in response to facts? Go read the beginners guide to MV3. Maybe you could learn a thing or two before talking about feelings.

    southsamurai ,
    @southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

    You gave no facts, just opinions.

    And if you aren’t aware, astroturfing is a thing.

    FartsWithAnAccent ,
    @FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io avatar

    Of course they're aware, they're doing it right now.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    I gave you facts about MV3. It is also explained at the beginning of the uBOL GitHub page which even acknowledges MV3 adds protections to users with some filtering tradeoffs. Those tradeoffs can be implemented in other ways but it is more work and would require other software. I am not here saying Google is perfect or that MV3 is perfect, but it does make installing extensions more secure for the average user. If you don’t agree then be specific. This vagueness that you keep utilizing without providing any details at all to try to make a point is a clear sign that you honestly have no clue what you’re talking about.

    FartsWithAnAccent ,
    @FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io avatar

    Yeah, that's not even how Ublock Origin fucking works, what a hilariously ignorant take.

    timewarp , (edited )
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Did I say that the author of uBlock Origin actually reads your traffic? No I didn’t, so stop the bad faith arguments. I said that MV2 exposed users to malicious extensions that were able to do that. Most features of uBO work fine with uBOL. Not everything does though, and I do acknowledge that. I’m just saying MV3 does make a majority of users safer overall.

    conciselyverbose ,

    Seeing all your traffic is required for an ad blocker to function correctly.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    An ad blocker doesn’t need to see your traffic to function. That is the point of the declarative APIs. It is supposed to help protect users from malicious extensions and some forms of malicious software.

    conciselyverbose ,

    Yes, it absolutely does.

    An adblocker has unconditional complete control of my browser because I want it to have unconditional complete control of my browser, because it cannot do what I want it to any other way. Taking that control away from me is malicious by definition. It’s more malicious when every single person on the planet with a shred of tech knowledge knows with certainty that it’s for the sole purpose of boosting Google’s ad revenue at the expense of their users.

    Blackmist ,

    Sadly I’m far more attached to ad blocking than I am to a browser.

    stellargmite ,

    I guess you want the internet to be a place for finding useful information, and/or the entertainment you choose to access, over it being a long uninteruptable stream of infomercials for crap products you have no interest in? Then groogle is not for you. In fact groogle is not for humanity.

    Buddahriffic ,

    Frankly, at this point I might even be more attached to blocking ads than browsing.

    Zink ,

    That’s a funny way to say “you should uninstall chrome rather than leaving it unused” but I hear you Google. 🫡

    Persen , (edited )

    Well, I’m forced if I want to use casting to androidTV or chromecast. Edit: fx-cast exists.

    girsaysdoom ,

    Yeah, there isn’t a very good alternative other than occasionally getting lucky that it’s compatible with VLC streaming.

    Persen ,

    I think it usually works with VLC (but usually not performant), but I don’t think there is an alternative for cast on android (without gapps)

    hal_5700X , (edited )

    Yeah, we saw this coming. When Manifest v3 first talked about.

    Google an ad company are killing ad blockers. Yeah, that sounds right.

    partial_accumen ,

    Google an ad company are killing ab blockers Chrome browsers. Yeah, that sounds right.

    FTFY

    DivineDev ,

    I wish, but I don't see it happening. Most people are just content with seeing ads absolutely everywhere, I just don't get it.

    Rolder ,

    I wouldn’t mind the basic shit like a banner here or a side bar there. But the fucking obnoxious mid page ads, auto playing videos, scam link shit can go die in a hole.

    partial_accumen ,

    I wouldn’t mind the basic shit like a banner here or a side bar there.

    Since those are semi-regularly vectors for malware now, even those are not safe to allow.

    Rampsquatch ,

    I used to not mind them, now I do. They over did it and I can’t go back. I will block ads untill I can’t and then I’ll probably climb a clock tower with an Uzi.

    I won’t really climb a clock tower with an Uzi.

    grysbok ,
    @grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

    It’s things like this that keep me using an ad blocker. I was researching when sunflowers develop their seeds, for crying out loud. Screenshot of a plug-in which has blocked ”127 ads" on this pageEdit: this was on Opera. It’s… fine.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    MV3 doesn’t kill ad blockers. uBOL (uBlock Origin Lite) blocks ads, is by the same author and uses MV3. The issue is MV2 made it way too easy for malicious browser extensions to do bad things, like read the content of every page you visit. MV3 makes it much harder for malicious browser extensions to do these things, but makes it harder to do things like intercept network requests.

    Some of these “features” that classic uBO used are available in MV3 but requires different permissions. Some of them could also be implemented with native messaging. The main uBO author though feels slighted by Google and went on a trash talking campaign against Google, and to be fair had a few good points. Anyway, most people on social media now care more about how Chromium and Firefox makes them feel now irregardless of facts. They think their emotions somehow are the same as facts.

    partial_accumen ,

    The issue is MV2 made it way too easy for malicious browser extensions to do bad things, like read the content of every page you visit. MV3 makes it much harder for malicious browser extensions to do these things, but makes it harder to do things like intercept network requests.

    Then allow a savvy user to choose to keep MV2 mode via an opt-in control instead of depreciating years of hard work by non-malicious extension authors. uBlock Origin is, in fact, the ONLY browser extension I use in Chrome, as Firefox is my main browser.

    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    I agree they should have tried to find more ways to keep the old behavior. MV3 rollout has already been delayed for a long time, and now users merely get a message. I’m not sure that the community (mostly Google contributors) won’t give in or try to find a way to keep MV2. However, what was done with MV2 can now be done with MV3 with native messaging or other network tools… I think the concern is that allowing an exception makes it much easier for a malicious extension or software to get users to agree not realizing what they’re agreeing to. Furthermore, the declarative approach is actually preferable by many. You get most of the same features without exposing all your traffic to an extension.

    TrickDacy ,
    @TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

    And yet the likelihood of Google publishing a malicious extension is quite low. Not sure why you’re so adamant about defending their shitty anti-adblock actions, making excuses for a mega corporation.

    timewarp , (edited )
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar

    Apple, Microsoft, Google, Steam, Arch Linux, NixOS, Flathub, etc. all end up publishing malicious software in their stores and package managers. It is inevitable. If you’re not worried about sandboxing then you might as well proxy all your traffic using third party software.

    TrickDacy ,
    @TrickDacy@lemmy.world avatar

    The fact that something is possible does not make it frequent or likely.

    Phoenix3875 ,

    From my understanding, MV3 kills vital features of ad-blockers in that

    1. Some filtering rules do rely on the ability to read the content of the webpage, which can’t be migrated, per the FAQ linked in the article
    2. The declarative API means an update to the rules requires an update to the plugin itself, which might get delayed by the reviewing process, causing the blocker to lag behind the tracker. It might not be able to recover as quickly as uBO in the recent YouTube catch-up round.
    timewarp ,
    @timewarp@lemmy.world avatar
    1. uBOL GitHub does a pretty good job of explaining some challenges, and some of them are better tracked in the issues.
    2. Your second point isn’t accurate though and MV3 does support dynamic rules.
    sapporo ,

    . Some of them could also be implemented with native messaging.

    Some? Or all?

    uBlockOrigin would still loose some of its features and capabilities nonetheless, even if a sub-set of them could be implemented in other ways. Not?

    tiredofsametab ,

    killing ab blockers

    I might finally get a six-pack!

    aesthelete ,

    The modern Internet is completely unusable without an ad blocker. Way to remake ie6, Google!

    Ragnarok314159 ,

    Got my boomer mom to finally install an ad blocker. She was tired of looking at a webpage, having an ad give some kind of script run error, and then it reloads back at the top. It’s a big problem on the cooking websites she goes to.

    I would rather go back to the days of shitty pop-ups you can just close. These ads are far worse, and none of them even make sense.

    dan ,
    @dan@upvote.au avatar

    the cooking websites she goes to.

    based.cooking doesn’t have everything, but it’s growing and the site is very clean.

    nossaquesapao ,

    What a really interesting initiative. I will try to contribute some things in their repo.

    Ragnarok314159 ,

    This is amazing and thank you.

    pete_the_cat ,

    Every time I turn off uBlock and reload a webpage I’m like “JFC this is eye cancer”.

    RufusFirefly ,
    @RufusFirefly@lemmy.world avatar

    Even with an ad blocker, it gets more unusable every year that goes by

    madcaesar ,

    DO YOU WANT TO ACCEPT OUR COOKIES OR CUSTOMIZE THESE BULLSHIT OPTIONS???

    RufusFirefly ,
    @RufusFirefly@lemmy.world avatar

    The only options I want are Girl Scout thin mints or peanut butter cookies

    sugar_in_your_tea ,

    Missing Samoas, those are delicious.

    nossaquesapao , (edited )

    I already know a few people who were just marginally digitally literate, and now they can’t read things like news articles and access several kinds of services anymore, unless someone helps them, because they don’t property know how to close invasive popups and solve captchas.

    The internet is literally becoming unusable for some people.

    RufusFirefly ,
    @RufusFirefly@lemmy.world avatar

    I’m in my mid 60s and know a few people that never even heard the term “browser extension” before. How they tolerate using the web with no ad blocking is beyond me.

    CoffeeJunkie ,

    …Oh, no! Anyway. Just giving people one more reason to finally make the switch to Firefox or something different.

    Google Chrome warns about disabling uBlock Origin. I warn Google Chrome that they’re being a little bitch & they’re going to lose users.

    Tja ,

    Oh no, they are about to lose the $0 that uBlock origin users bring!

    They know they will lose users and they don’t care. They will make much more per user selling ads than before. Google is an ad company. They’re not a browser company, or a mobile OS company, or an office suite company. It’s all about ads.

    Olgratin_Magmatoe ,

    Not necessarily. They still get money from selling user data. So they likely still care about losing users who use adblocking to at least some degree.

    CasualPenguin ,

    Good point, but also it’s not that they will lose all of the user data they sell if people switch off Chrome, just the parts that chrome collects.

    If they were blocking ublock users from accessing any google products then it would be purely a ‘we only care about ad revenue’

    It would be very interesting to see the internal data they use to make these decisions, but also knowing tech these decisions were probably made by a series of mid level managers sufficiently sucking the air out of the room until a critical mass was hit to make this happen

    Olgratin_Magmatoe ,

    They absolutely also get data through means other than their browser. But they data they get off of the browser directly is probably a shit load.

    but also knowing tech these decisions were probably made by a series of mid level managers sufficiently sucking the air out of the room until a critical mass was hit to make this happen

    1000%

    I’m sure a bunch of bean counters were involved as well.

    person420 ,

    Google doesn’t sell user data, they sell user eyeballs. There’s no incentive for Google to sell user data since they’re an ad company and the only people who would buy the data are competitors.

    Olgratin_Magmatoe , (edited )

    Maybe you’re right, I don’t have any certainty in this. But I don’t buy google’s word on this for a second.

    www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/tech/…/index.html

    tampabay.com/…/google-selling-users-personal-data…

    mercurynews.com/…/google-selling-users-personal-d…

    Corpos like to lie, and their promises to not sell data is worthless. Even if they’re not outright selling data directly, or “anonymizing it” before selling it, at a bare minimum they’re still abusing the hoard of data they have to make a buck. They want that data and get large amounts of it through people’s broswers, even with adblockers installed.

    person420 ,

    Your first link talks about Google consuming data for its AI

    Your next two links (which are talking about the same thing) talks about how other companies are abusing Google’s adbid system to try and collect correlated data against their own.

    Love it or hate it, Google has been pretty transparent that they use your data for advertising, but nothing there talks about Google selling your data to third parties.

    snugglesthefalse ,

    They also gain people spreading word of mouth advice to never use chrome

    Tja ,

    If you also spread the word about uBlock, same rule applies.

    Bluetreefrog ,

    Sounds like another reason not to use Chrome.

    VantaBrandon ,

    Could turn out to be a good thing. All power users will dump Chrome practically overnight, a huge boon to the alternatives, that could actually give them enough momentum to compete with Google for a change. I’m sure they’ve considered this, probably an empty treat.

    JackbyDev ,

    I’m not sure how wide the intersection of power users that use uBO but also haven’t heard of the manifest v3 deprecation coming since like 2019 actually is, but that could be because I’m the type of person to randomly recommend browsers to people and discuss them a lot.

    pyre ,

    me too. a long time ago i practically forced everyone around me to switch to chrome. now I’m doing the opposite.

    ghterve ,

    I for one have been in denial and probably won’t switch away until it literally stops working. So, there’s hope.

    GoogleSellsAds ,
    @GoogleSellsAds@sh.itjust.works avatar

    That’s pretty optimistic, as tons of power users are still eating that Windows crap, too.

    trafficnab ,

    Every browser is either chromium (open source captured by Google) or exists because of a Google search contract (this represents 80% of Mozilla’s revenue), Google can’t lose

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •