• fernandofig@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Well, Thorium developer stated he intends to support Mv2 past the 2025 deadline. Whether he’ll make it, we’ll see. It’s a one man show, there was some drama involving it in the past, and there’s the question of what’s the point in maintaining Mv2 extensions support if you won’t be able to install them from the store after they’re cut off?

    • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      To clarify for anyone curious about the drama, while it was blown out of proportion, it was absolutly vaild.

      1. there was a light nsfw furry easter egg, removed once found. Considering the browser was originally a side project by a young guy (teen/early 20?) it’s not really surprising or a big deal. Once the browser gained a sudden boost in users and it was found, the image was removed (once the guy got back from vacation? hospital?, there was a month or two gap)

      2. this one was a larger problem for sure, and again removed. If I reacll right, he was apparently hosting a website for a friend about supporting the end of a certain procedure done to baby males at birth. There were some graphic images, its not technically CP anymore than the infomus Nirvana cover, but still…not okay.

      To make matters worse, the link the site was somewhere browsers home or about page, making it pretty easy for anyone to find.


      It’s all old news now. Personally I didn’t really care, but some people might.

      • fernandofig@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I don’t actually care about the drama per se at this point either. I mentioned it because, along with the fact that:

        • development is not very open (in that only that one guy commits and releases stuff)
        • release cadence is very erratic and often lags behind upstream chromium, which is a direct consequence of the previous point
        • you mentioned about the guys absence - the first time was some time ago and he was inpatient in the hospital for (IIRC) alcohol abuse, and this absence actually coincided with the drama over the furry and the other stuff, so it took awhile for it to be addressed, which only added more fuel to the fire. The second was just this last couple of months were he was house sitting for his parents (mentioned on the release notes I linked before)

        All of this paints a bleak outlook for the long term health of this project, IMO. Which is too bad , because I still think it’s one of the better forks of chromium.

  • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago
    • the answer is 1

    • it’s Firefox

    • Vivaldi is supporting for less than a year (June 2025 it stop) and edge is unclear but may support it simultaneously (at least for now). Brave has “partial support” which means it may as well not and they’ve left a “lot of wiggle room” to drop support in their statement.

    If you want to keep using ublock origin, get Firefox. You should just get Firefox because it’s the best browser for privacy/not using chromium in general and it works well.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      i don’t know why people are so allergic to firefox but it is the answer.

      its the only halfway decent answer. install firefox and switch to it.

      • Corvidae@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I love Firefox, used to use it all the time. Now it’s slower on Ubuntu than Brave. I mean slow as in irritating to use, click and wait.

        • ture@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Then something must be wrong with the way you configured your OS.

          • Corvidae@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            umbrella at lemmy.ml wrote:

            i don’t know why people are so allergic to firefox…

            To which I offered a possible answer. Does everyone have misconfigured operating systems?

            The Best Web Browsers of 2024 | HighSpeedInternet.com

            Mozilla’s Firefox browser isn’t known for speed. It falls into last place in most of our tests for Windows and Mac, and that’s okay. Firefox is more about security features than speed, which is ideal if you’re more concerned about blocking malware than loading pages in a flash.

            Yep, I’d probably be wasting my time going down the uninstall-reinstall rabbit hole and would probably not find speed increases.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          thats probably because you are using the snap version of firefox canonical is pushing.

          a big reason why i want to ditch ubuntu.

      • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Classic letting perfect get in the way of good. Firefox is excellent as is. Hate Mozilla? Get one of the quality forks. Which exist because we have firefox.

    • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Hardly surprising considering that Brave, Vivaldi and Edge are all based on Chromium. The Brave and Vivaldi team won’t have the resources to maintain Manifest v2 support for each new Chromium version, and Microsoft doesn’t have any reason to support v2 with Edge outside of goodwill.

    • kubica@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      They are just giving some time for the waters to calm a bit, and then say that it is taking too much effort.

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The answer is more than one, because Firefox has several forks of its own, and as far as I know all of them (even Pale Moon, which is highly divergent and never supported Manifest V2) support uBlock.

      I agree that all Chromium-based browsers are going to drop support sooner or later.

      • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        That’s fair. Firefox and its forks will reliably still support ublock origin.

        I was going off the list with Firefox listed as #1, but I see that reads now as “just 1.”

    • Clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Vivaldi does a lot of adblocking natively, and they are maintaining V2 as long as they can, which based on info from Google is summer 2025 but might change.

      • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yes but that doesn’t change the fact that in 10mo uBlock origin won’t work on Vivaldi. The perils of chromium builds. I don’t blame Vivaldi, I’m just stating a fact. They won’t support Mv2 and uBlock origin will not work.

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Brave has “partial support” which means it may as well not

      They don’t need v2 because their ad-blocking has always been built into the browser itself.

      Personally don’t really care about the browser because the ad-blocking is built into my router and VPN and the apps I use and so many other things.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Brave is based on Chromium, so where Chrome goes, Brave is likely to follow.

        Routers and VPNs are only able to filter URLs. They have no way of manipulating the browser session, which is the other half of uBlock’s functionality and why it will always be superior to PiHoles or ad-blocking DNS.

        Google, for example, smuggles ads through their “good” domains on YouTube that deliver video content; at that point, it’s an endless game of whack-a-mole in the dark to have a list that filters the correct URL without obliterating the ability to watch videos.

        URL filtering is better than nothing, but it’s not really a comparable solution.

        • Engywuck@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Brave is based on Chromium, so where Chrome goes, Brave is likely to follow.

          To follow what? Brave’s adblocker is not an extension and it is not affected by MV3. And it has most of uBO’s features. More than I have ever used on uBO anyway.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            True, uBO doesn’t have a shitty cryptobro component unfortunately. Also I hate that it’s not bankrolled by a conservative sociopath

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Right the only thing that matters is technology. That’s why I think Facebook has the right to facilitate genocides any time they want! /s

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          where Chrome goes, Brave is likely to follow.

          What is that supposed to mean? You realize Chromium-based browsers and Chrome are not the same thing? Brave is made by a completely different company making independent development decisions.

          Google, for example, smuggles ads through their “good” domains on YouTube that deliver video content; at that point, it’s an endless game of

          I don’t know anything about that. I just know that I don’t use the browser to watch YT videos because it’s an absolute nightmare. I use FreeTube, GrayJay, LibreTube, etc.

          I also know I don’t have any problems with ads.

          • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Brave is not completely independent of chrome. It’s completely and entirely dependent on it. Brave developers don’t and probably can’t develope a modern web browser. All they do is adapt chromium to have a few extra features.

            There is only three major web browsers. Firefox, safari and chrome. Everything else is just a few addons, preconfigured settings and UI changes. Even chrome was largely safari until Google forked their web engine.

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Brave is not completely independent of chrome

              That’s not what I said. I said it’s completely independent of Google.

              All they do is adapt chromium to have a few extra features.

              If you used it for 5 minutes you’d know that’s not true. Quit making shit up.

              None of this has anything to do with the topic at hand (ad blocking) which Brave has built into the browser and functions the same as uBo. If it didn’t work, you might as well use Chrome so they have every incentive to ensure that it does and no incentive to stop it. Even if they did, you could switch later just like you could today.

              I’m not trying to convince anyone to use Brave, it has plenty of drawbacks and concerns without pulling random ones out of your ass.

              • notabot@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Both Brave and Chrome are built on the open-source Chromium browser engine

                That’s from the Brave website: https://brave.com/compare/chrome-vs-brave/

                Yes there are plenty of changes, but it’s built on it, and shaped by it, and Chromium is heavily influenced by Google. If chromium doesn’t support v2 manifests it is unlikely that Brave will. In this particular case it may be that Brave’s ad blocking and privacy features are equivalent to uBO, but it’s still underpinned by an engine that Google has strong influence over, so it can’t completely shake their influence.

                • helenslunch@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  That’s from the Brave website

                  Nobody doesn’t know that it’s built on Chromium. The problem is you’re grossly overestimating the influence that Google has or wants. If Google wanted to control it, they would just not create Chromium in the first place, and force you to just use Chrome.

                  Do you have any evidence at all that Brave is controlled by Google in any way that is against their will? Anything that prevents them from doing whatever they want? Any evidence at all? Do you really think they wouldn’t say anything if they were?

                  GrapheneOS, LineageOS, eOS, CopperheadOS and CalyxOS all work identically but no one points at those and says they’re “controlled” by Google.

              • Serinus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Are you not really in the tech industry? Because he’s right. And he’s sticking to facts.

      • ngwoo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Adblocking should be accessible to every layperson and not just people who know how to set up a pihole or use a VPN. It’s a basic security feature.

  • Engywuck@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    You don’t need extenssions when you have capable inbluit adblockers. Stop fear mongering.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Unless by built in, you mean the ublock that comes with librewolf, thats fucking stupid. Adblocking is an armsrace that requires constant up to date collaboration on the adblock developer side. Thats why you need crossplatform plugins like ublock, otherwise you will end up seeing ads.

      • Engywuck@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        No, Vivaldi, Brave and Opera have builtin adblockers which don’t depend on the extensions manifest. Plus, one could always rely on AdGuard, which whould block ads system wide.

      • Engywuck@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        thats fucking stupid

        Thanks, I respect you too.

        I’ts been 3 years since I last used uBO and I hace still to see a single ad on my browser. But you do you.

        • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I did not call you stupid, i called the things that you wrote stupid. Those are two very different things. You called the best practices, recommended for any user that wants to safely use a normal web browser, “fear mongering”. That is in fact a very stupid thing to do.

      • fne8w2ah@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Vivaldi browser also has a built-in ad blocker on all platforms, but the PC/Mac/Linux version also allows you to use uBlock Origin as well (at least until mid-2025).

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Every thread that mentions Firefox draws hate from you. It’s tiring and your points are never good.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Or you could stop raging about the only choice we have against a browser monopoly. You don’t have to make up excuses to hate it and then broadcast them to an audience who mostly disagrees

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ve done tests with the built-in Firefox strict mode vs uBlock and there’s a bit of a difference. Firefox blocks about two thirds, uBlock is almost 100%.

      • Engywuck@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Firefox doesn’t have a proper adblocker. It’s just a tracker blocker.

      • Engywuck@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Everybody knows that Chrome, the only browser made by Google, has a built-in adblocker. /s

        Being called names just for stating the obvious. Typical lemmy.

        It’s not my fault if Mozilla won’t bother implementing a decent adblocker and have to rely on an external unpaid developer to keep FF afloat.

        • communism@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Firefox is a browser, not an adblocker. Why would they make their own adblocker when there are already independent adblockers that are very good? I would suggest Firefox just come pre-installed with uBlock Origin

          • Engywuck@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            “Firefox is a browser, not an ad measurement tool. What would they sneakily introduce an OPT-OUT ad efficacy measurement tool”?

            People would really do anything to justify Mozilla’s bullshit.

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Open up the “Registry Editor” Program

    Navigate to: Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Google\Chrome

    With the Chrome folder on the left highlighted, select Edit/New/DWORD (32-Bit Value)

    or, if you prefer, on the right side of the screen in a BLANK SPOT, you can RIGHT CLICK New/DWORD (32-Bit Value).

    Name it ExtensionManifestV2Availability and hit enter.

    Right click what you just created (ExtensionManifestV2Availability) and click Modify. Set the Hexadecimal value to 2, and click OK.

    You’re done, but check your work by opening Chrome, and pasting chrome://policy in the URL Address bar and hit enter. You >

    should see the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy, and the value should be set to 2. If you don’t see it, click “Reload Policies” > and/or review your work.

    https://www.neowin.net/news/official-windows-registry-hack-extends-ublock-origin-support-on-google-chrome-edge/