[lxgr]

> This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox.

Oof, so even people that should really know better are now equating MV3 with "no more ad blocking"? I think at this point the entire thing just needs to be renamed.

(Only Chrome removed the request blocking API from their MV3 implementation; Firefox did not.)

[DangitBobby]

We shouldn't equate it with "no more ad blocking" because it didn't ship with an attempt to make ad blockers less effective or because that's not all it shipped with?

[ragall]

"This will ensure certain types of add-ons, like ad-blockers, continue to work best in Firefox" clearly means that MV3 makes ad blocking worse, not entirely disabled. How can you get "no more ad blocking" out of that ?

[lxgr]

Again, no. MV3 (the specification) does not do anything to ad blocking. Chrome's implementation of MV3 does.

For precision, I should have said "significantly worse ad blocking", not exaggerated as "no more ad blocking".

[ragall]

This is all sophistry. The spec is irrelevant, what matters is only the implementation and the fact that Chrome has a crushing dominance.

[lxgr]

How does Chrome’s implementation matter in an article about Firefox?

[ragall]

In a market so crushingly dominated by one monopolist, everything is about what the monopolist does.

[msla]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Manifest_V3_2

> However, DeclarativeWebRequest is limited in the number of rules that may be set, and the types of expressions that may be used.[336] Additionally, the prohibition of remotely-hosted code will restrict the ability for filter lists to be updated independently of the extension itself. As the Chrome Web Store review process has an invariable length, filter lists may not be updated in a timely fashion.[337][338]

Is that not true?

[lxgr]

It is, but it’s not relevant. Firefox offers both APIs.

[jeroenhd]

The people who know better should also know that tech social media was flooded with people not knowing what they were talking about mentioning manifest versions.

It wouldn't be the first time tech gossip rags would take something Mozilla did out of proportion to make outrage videos about that become a hit on Reddit.

When Mozilla added some weird AI thing (I think it was page summaries?) I was asked by people whose algorithm picked up this nonsense whether it'd be better for their privacy to switch back to Chrome or Edge.

[swed420]

> It wouldn't be the first time tech gossip rags would take something Mozilla did out of proportion to make outrage videos about that become a hit on Reddit.

Sounds like the issue here is paid social media platforms, where everybody is looking for ways to differentiate their slop from the rest. It would be weird to expect a different outcome.

[stavros]

Did Vivaldi? Or Brave? Will uBlock work properly with Mv3 and request blocking?

[lxgr]

Of course everything based on Chromium will inherit most of Chrome's decisions, including this one. (Unless they fork their entire web extension implementation and maintain the fork forever.)

[stavros]

Yeah but then "only Chrome" is misleading, when it's actually "every major browser except Firefox".

[ahartmetz]

Safari isn't exactly non-major. By the way, it seems like WebKit Embedded (~resource-efficient Linux port) has regained some steam due to Igalia's work over the last two years or so.

[zarzavat]

Brave still supports UBo though. How long they can maintain that support is an open question.

[stavros]

Non-Chrome Chromium browsers should band together and support request blocking for Mv3 at this point. It would be one compelling feature that differentiates them from Chrome.

[lxgr]

A single engine/implementation deprecated the feature. I don’t think this is particularly misleading in a hacker news context.

[topranks]

Every major browser except Firefox is Chrome

[jim33442]

or Safari