Google’s campaign against ad blockers across its services just got more aggressive. According to a report by PC World, the company has made some alterations to its extension support on Google Chrome.
Google Chrome recently changed its extension support from the Manifest V2 framework to the new Manifest V3 framework. The browser policy changes will impact one of the most popular adblockers (arguably), uBlock Origin.
The transition to the Manifest V3 framework means extensions like uBlock Origin can’t use remotely hosted code. According to Google, it “presents security risks by allowing unreviewed code to be executed in extensions.” The new policy changes will only allow an extension to execute JavaScript as part of its package.
Over 30 million Google Chrome users use uBlock Origin, but the tool will be automatically disabled soon via an update. Google will let users enable the feature via the settings for a limited period before it’s completely scrapped. From this point, users will be forced to switch to another browser or choose another ad blocker.
You‘re barging into open doors mate. You should still accept that the best way of changing things is taking up responsibility. You can definitely open an issue regarding their communication choices and propose changes.
And again, they probably have an ongoing community on the existing platforms which means bridges will be necessary which means proprietary platforms will listen in on all convos on bridged platforms.
You cant make people do the thing you think is best. You can only help them.
You can’t just “open an issue” if you don’t have a Microsoft GitHub account or live in a region under US sanctions or censorship where you can’t get access to it. These are pillars of sand to build your community on that not only lack freedom for users, but access too & control for your own content + moderation.
Gateways don’t need to be the only answer too—even just mentioning an unofficial space lets those that don’t want their data harvest can hang out together under the same topic but away from those service (even if most of the chat log is public, unencrypted anyhow).
Developers of all folks should know better & know the issues caused by proprietary services. They should not plan for where users are now but where they want things no be in the future but there’s a myopic view of this is where the users are. They don’t even give folks a place to air grievances like you are suggesting.
Oh man… I don’t disagree completely but thats still not how this works.
Github alternatives are very early in their existence. Things like gitlab, forgejo and such are very limiting if you want to promote a new project.
Although you are technically right, your premise is much too strict. If you cant be asked to help people do the right thing, I dont think you‘re in the right place discussing foss things.
I can solely repeat what I said earlier: be the change you want to see. Help people do the right thing and stop removed about all the things that unpaid volunteers are doing wrong in your opinion.