[tomxor]

> the changes seem like a step in the right direction [...] However, that optimization costs so much for innovative ad blocking.

This is fair. For an ad-blocker to be effective today it needs to be invasive, and that doesn't apply to most extensions.

It is too easy to grant invasive privileges to v2 extensions for those that do not understand the consequences. Downloading a whole new browser on the other hand is a far more obvious way of implicitly granting that trust... So I wonder if when push comes to shove, a "uBlocked-Chrome" browser might emerge. To be clear, I am suggesting a uBlock integration project, not a preservation of V2 for extensions.

[a5aAqU]

I don't think that will work because Google controls Chromium. They will play a long game to sabotage the abilities of smaller Chromium browsers to block ads. Advertising is their business model and they have a lot of money to spend on crushing smaller browsers that have a different vision of what the Web should be.

[tomxor]

Many browsers track chromium upstream with substantial changes, most significant of all would be Qt WebEngine.

[a5aAqU]

Google is full of smart people who get paid to deal with obstacles like that. If your goal is to block ads and tracking, it's extremely unwise to depend on software that is fundamentally controlled by an ad company. If someone threatens their business model, they will throw an overwhelming amount of money at the problem. They are boiling frogs, so most people won't notice. Killing uBlock Origin and disallowing browser extensions on mobile are just small steps in a long-term plan.