~~https://www.neowin.net/news/ublock-origin-developer-recommends-switching-to-ublock-lite-as-chrome-flags-the-extension/~~

EDIT: Apologies. Updated with a link to what gorhill REALLY said:

Manifest v2 uBO will not be automatically replaced by Manifest v3 uBOL[ight]. uBOL is too different from uBO for it to silently replace uBO – you will have to explicitly make a choice as to which extension should replace uBO according to your own prerogatives.

Ultimately whether uBOL is an acceptable alternative to uBO is up to you, it’s not a choice that will be made for you.

Will development of uBO continue? Yes, there are other browsers which are not deprecating Manifest v2, e.g. Firefox.

    • Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      from the umatrix chrome store reviews:

      It’s great for advanced users, for the time being. The project is no longer being developed (since 2021) and the Github repository has been archived. It will probably, mostly, continue to work for years. Probably. Apparently you can get some support from uBlock github site, I have no knowledge on the details of this.

      github backs that up https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix

      From the looks of things it still works but i’m afraid to recommend something that isn’t maintained to normal users.

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

    The best action ublock origions devs can take is drop support for chromium based browsers and retract ublock lite from the chrome webstore.

    I was hopefull for something more than just a wiki page on github. adding a banner to chrome’s add-on menu is way more powerful and far more reaching than what they did

    • AShadyRaven@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      i crave decisiveness like that. it would make me so happy if that sort of behavior became the norm.

      too many corpos getting away with murder because they are more convenient than their competitors or because switching is too hard

    • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Guess you get to find out if this will be effecting all of chromium or just chrome…

      • 0oWow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Brave has added a feature to explicitly enable MV2 apps and install uBo directly from Brave settings. You can also install uMatrix and Adguard MV2 versions also.

          • 0oWow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            And jump to the clone? Mozilla isn’t better (consider their recent Ad Privacy clone), they just have less market share.

            That said, I use Firefox and Brave. Whatever I feel like at the time.

            • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              The clone? Are you implying that mozilla (founded 1998) is a clone of chrome (first launched 2008)?

              Just use anything but chome or chromium if you can. Just don’t feed the beast now known as alphabet.

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

              There are plenty of browsers built on Gecko that aren’t fire fox. So if you don’t trust Mozilla to build your browser, and don’t want your ad blocker bricked by Google, you have options.

      • Traister101@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Brave is forked from Chromium so hypothetically they could maintain V2 but they’d need their own store as they currently rely on Googles

  • uzay@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    What the uBlock dev actually said:

    https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/wiki/About-Google-Chrome’s-“This-extension-may-soon-no-longer-be-supported”

    Manifest v2 uBO will not be automatically replaced by Manifest v3 uBOL[ight]. uBOL is too different from uBO for it to silently replace uBO – you will have to explicitly make a choice as to which extension should replace uBO according to your own prerogatives.

    Ultimately whether uBOL is an acceptable alternative to uBO is up to you, it’s not a choice that will be made for you.

    Will development of uBO continue? Yes, there are other browsers which are not deprecating Manifest v2, e.g. Firefox.

  • cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    They should recommend switching to Firefox instead. It’s clear that Google cannot be allowed to have a monopoly on browsers.

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

    The ‘block element’ picker is the big one that can not be implemented in the lite version.

    Also included block lists can’t update unless the extension itself updates.

    If you’re not stuck on chrome due to workplace policy or something, now is the time to switch to Firefox

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

    So what are the consequences of it being flagged? Does it change how it operates?

    I don’t use chrome so it doesn’t directly impact me but I like being up-to-date on this stuff

    Edit: actually read the article lol so this is related to compatibility with manifest v3

  • Dju@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Comment from gorhill (the developer of uBO and uBOL):

    I didn’t recommend to switch to uBO Lite, the article made that up. I merely pointed out Google Chrome currently presents uBO Lite as an alternative (along with 3 other content blockers), explained what uBO Lite is, and concluded that it may or may not be considered an acceptable alternative, it’s for each person to decide.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1ejhpu5/comment/lgdmthd/

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

      “uBlock Origin developer slams NeoWin, backpedals on recommendation!” —NeoWin editors, probably.

      • TeoTwawki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Sounds about right for any news outlet. “Slams” is so overused, and usually nowhere near an accurate euphamism.

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

          How did supposedly intellectual people ever conclude that we should use the word “slam” on the daily in headlines?

          It’s straight out of Idiocracy and I will never get used to it.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Because not only is it emotive (and they love emotive language to get you to click), it’s also just an objectively fantastic word for a headline in that it’s very concise and helps headlines fit on a single line.

            Headline space is limited, so it’s easier to go with “X slams Y over Z” as opposed to “X criticises Y over Z” or “X denounces Y over Z” or “X castigates Y over Z”

            It’s annoying how much it’s seen. But I get why they do it.

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

              it’s also just an objectively fantastic word

              100% disagree

              “X criticises Y over Z” or “X denounces Y over Z” or “X castigates Y over Z”

              All of these are better. They’re honest about what’s happening and most people understand them. “Slams” implies some level of violence or at least force. Not only isn’t that dishonest most of the time, it could devalue the word to that point that it just simply has no meaning. I refuse to internalize it as best as I can, but if they had their way I would think “slam” means a brutal vitriolic takedown. Instead I know it normally means “mildly comments on” these days.

              Fuck “slam” in headlines.

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

                You’re interpreting me saying “it’s objectively good in headlines because it’s extremely short and clear what it means” as “I love it when they say ‘slams’!”

                I was very explicit in saying I don’t like it. It’s just objectively (not subjectively) a good word for headlines.

                I am not making an emotional argument to you. I’m just answering the question of why they use it. If you didn’t actually want an answer to the question, you should’ve made it clearer it was a rhetorical question.

                Slam does not imply violence or force lol.

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

                  If you didn’t actually want an answer to the question

                  I thought it’s clear when we ask a question that can’t actually be answered, because thousands of journalists are not one person we can ask, it’s not meant to be taken 100% literally.

                  Slam does not imply violence or force lol.

                  Of course it does. That’s 100% the only reason why they use it this way. Notice how that’s explicit in every definition but the last (the newer, still less-common usage I’m taking issue with):

                  I love when people want to quibble about word definitions, being super strict or loose whenever it suits them. In the real world, people use words loosely and over time the connotation changes. Hence definition 4’s existence here.

                  My main problem with using the word this way is that it’s rarely honest. I am annoyed by it because it sounds stupid, but like I said, more importantly:

                  if they had their way I would think “slam” means a brutal vitriolic takedown. Instead I know it normally means “mildly comments on” these days.

            • jabathekek@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              Unless you’re lucky enough to get tenure, or stumble upon a fact of the universe that no one knew and just happens to be relevant to a modern economy.

  • Butterpaderp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I just got firefox yesterday, cause I noticed youtube started baking unskippable ads into their site.

    • irotsoma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’ve been using LibreWolf on Desktop and Mull on Android. Basically more securely configured versions of Firefox with the proprietary telemetry and some other stuff removed. Takes some tweaking to get certain websites to work that need more access than they should or use Certificate Authorities that don’t have working OSCP servers.

      • saplyng@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Thanks for sharing the extension! I just got some passkeys and they just weren’t working on several websites for Firefox (looking at you Azure) but that solved the issue immediately!

      • bluewing@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I"m going to try that extension to see if it helps with a couple of websites. So thanks for the recommendation!

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        They lost what may end up being the biggest antitrust case in decades. And it’s not weak sauce like the ruling that may get overturned regarding the Play Store monopoly (which is kinda weak since Android manufacturers can and do include other app stores on their phones).

        It had to do with their anti-competitive behavior regarding Online Search. Specifically stuff like paying Apple and other manufacturers to make Google the default or even exclusive search engine, then using that not only to capture the market, but to charge more for ads than the competition they sabotage.

        As a bonus, it’ll probably hurt reddit too, since it almost certainly makes their recent deal with Google illegal.

        It’ll be appealed, but it’s a pretty big ruling. Between the US Courts, EU legislature, and what looks poised to be a flop for Gemini/Bard, Google is on its way to having a real shit year.

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

      I’m going to call foul play on Judge Mehta’s ruling. They are a direct competitor.

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

            Yup Racist commentary. Typical AIPAC.

            Family names aren’t a good attack vector in the US as we will hang family with suitable inducement. Gaza isn’t looking good for Israel.

            • Raxiel@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              One of Googles biggest competitor’s is the company “Meta” which is phonetically similar to the judges name. The previous commentator made a joke where they appeared to confuse the corporation for the person. A situation that would be absurd if true, and from there the humour arose.
              When a respondent (you) appeared to miss the subtext in the comment, and took it at face value, I made a post where I gave the impression I had made the same mistake , and suggested that the judge had previously had a name phonetically similar to “Facebook” which was the name previously used by the corporation now called “Meta”.

              Such a situation would require a coincidence even more implausible and absurd than the first, and was intended to demonstrate that neither comment should be taken seriously.

              Your comment indicates you either failed to identify the absurdity, possibly due to confirmation bias following your previous response. Or you are attempting to “up the ante” by erroneously taking such absurdity seriously for further humourous effect. Your follow up comments elsewhere suggest the former.

              Regardless, the “joke” has now been thoroughly killed by way of explanation. You can choose to accept the explanation or choose to remain in error.

              • pyrflie@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 months ago

                Not sure who you are responding too but it isn’t me. You didn’t make a joke and aren’t on facebook. Congrats on getting added to my bot list.

                • boonhet@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  They were explaining on how the joke flew over your head. If there’s reason to think anyone in this exchange is a bot, it’d be you, because you can’t really understand jokes even when they’re explained to you. Though nowadays, even bots understand jokes, ChatGPT can explain them fairly well.

  • ulkesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    Already switched as soon as I learned of Google’s plans. They can go screw themselves for doing this. Firefox, the land of the free and open source!