Google relents slightly on blocking ad-blockers – for paid-up enterprise Chrome users, everyone else not so much

Google decided to go through with the proposed changes to manifest V3. This means dynamic adblockers (e.g. UBO or uMatrix) are done on Chrome and other Chromium-based browsers (unless one of them forks Chromium). They do have an exception for enterprise users.

This was to be expected. I am glad I use Firefox (since 0.6 no less). :slight_smile:

EDIT: UBO/uMatrix dev’s take on the whole situation:

1 Like

Maybe I should just switch to using Firefox full time. I’ve been using Chromium for a while now, but I can adjust to just about any browser.

uBO - 10+ million users for chrome
Adblock + - 10+ million users for chrome

and that’s just for those 2 blockers and apparently the actual number of users may be more since the numbers in both cases are 10,000,000+

will be interesting to see the repercussions of their decision

1 Like

Yeah, they very well might lose a lot of their “loyal” users over stuff like this.

As usual, I hate Google, and everyone there. That is Larry Page, Brin, Eric, and the rest of them.

and it looks like the number of chrome users using an ad-blocker may be way higher then the 20 million stats for uBO and Adblock + - for another blocker, just plain AdBlock, the number of users is again listed as 10+ million, but in the add-on description the author claims over 60 mil. are using it … then there’s all the other spin-offs with hundreds of thousands of to millions using them - AdGuard AdBlocker for instance, 6.1 million, Adblock for Youtube, 4.7 mil., Adblocker for Chrome, 7.9 mil

unless gaagle changes their decision, i think there’s going to a huge exodus to other browsers - Mozilla must be drooling over this

think i’ll bookmark this and grab the popcorn

The 2nd Great Browser Wars have officially begun!

I bet Google will push even more BS in the future with Manifest V4 and mandatory usage of AMP (and similar schemes).

Back in the day, Google understood the power and potential of the web, but as of today they have morphed into yet another generic American megacorp run by borderline criminals (not to imply that API changes make someone a criminal, but there are other things to consider - e.g. Irish tax scams, bribery, Search with “Chinese characteristics” etc.).

They most likely would, but then again AMP is meant for mobile editions of websites. However that doesn’t mean Google should be forcing AMP, I prefer my websites through HTML.

bad google

Google%20evil%20corp%20spoof

1 Like

There won’t be another browser war. Google’s market share is so high and most people don’t even care about privacy let alone know what an adblocker is, so Chrome’s market share will go down no more than 1%.

If Google wants to run Firefox out of business, all it has to do is block users (not using chrome) from accessing it’s website or any of it’s services (bye bye youtube). The same could be said for any web browser. Microsoft may make it to where Windows users have to use their browser, but then they will lose a lot of money and a lot of customers in favor for Mac (because most of them didn’t know what a Linux was).

Google can get away with anything, because they know, that most people don’t care, and will use their services no matter what. We can try to resist, and make our own alternatives, but in the end, we’re going to fail, because for every one person that visits this site, realizes that Google is evil, and boycotts all of their services, there will be a minimum 10 people who come to Chrome for fast internet.

I generally agree with you. I don’t think this will have a significant impact on overall browser share (in the short to medium term).

I was hinting at the “positioning” effects from this decision. Over the past few years Google has been slowly transforming into a degenerate American megacorp. Their posture around manifest V3 suggests that in the near future we will see an exponential increase in borderline criminal behavior (I personally consider their status in browser market a criminal monopoly - criminal in the moral sense not US judicial BS). We now know that the emperor has no clothes.

With that in mind, I think this particular decision could be an inflection point where any reasonably tech-savvy person has to recognize the danger of Google (and by extension all other American corps). First it will be the geeks and then … who knows?

And you have to consider that in general the global trend has been towards increase skepticism of both American tech companies and the ideology that allows them operate in the way they do. I don’t remember anyone questioning the tech companies or even American-style authoritarian mercantilism in the 2000s or even early 2010s. Yet now, even some casual, non-technical users recognize the dangers of FB et al. (even if they don’t stop using it).

I recognize that I am being a little bit wishy-washy with all these quasi-historical tangents and extrapolations, but hey, that’s the way history works. You win win win, but then if all you have is BS (and money to promote that BS), one day you will lose. When that happens all bets are off.

On some level I am glad things are going the way are. It means the “opposition” is full of shit. They literally can’t control themselves because reasons. Google would have lost nothing from continuing to support the dynamic content filter API, yet a bunch of greedy, self-absorbed assholes decided to pull a quick one. That shows they are over-confident and they don’t really grasp what they are dealing with. They think they can indefinitely BS their way through this.

We’ll see what happens. :slight_smile:

looks to me like google turned to the dark side long before that…

Google’s true origin partly lies in CIA and NSA research grants for mass surveillance — Quartz

How The CIA Made Google | Zero Hedge

Google Teams Up with CIA to Fund “Recorded Future” Startup Monitoring Websites, Blogs & Twitter Accounts | Democracy Now!