Firefox says it will keep supporting uBlock Origin even as Microsoft Edge and other Chromium browsers phase it out under Manifest V3.

Firefox says it will keep supporting uBlock Origin even as Microsoft Edge and other Chromium browsers phase it out under Manifest V3.

  • Zephyr@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    8·
    1 day ago

    It’s not ready yet but there’s the ladybird project that has a lot of promise. I appreciate FF a lot but their code base is a mess, they need a modern rewrite of their browser engine. That’s why we’re getting all these chromium based browsers, it’s just a better base to build off of.

  • green_link@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    20 hours ago

    but brave still does…it has special support for manifest v2 extensions that are no longer supported in Chromium browsers.

    settings -> extensions->Manifest V2 extensions

    and just enable the extensions you want like ublock origin.

  • Pamasich@kbin.earth
    2·
    1 day ago

    Why do people in these threads always act like uBlock is the only adblocker out there? It’s true that MV3 nerfed adblockers in general, but not nearly as much as what I’ve heard about uBlock Lite. The one I’ve always been using hasn’t really changed functionally at all from what I can tell.

    Like, I see some people act like Chromium just doesn’t have usable adblockers at all anymore. That’s just not true.

  • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
    English
    22·
    2 days ago

    If it goes… I don’t know what I’ll do.

    Go out and touch grass probably.

    Get a hobby.

    Perfect my molotov recipe.

  • bullsworth@pawb.socialEnglish
    21·
    2 days ago

    Sometimes I think it was a mistake to let the programs we primarily use to view text and images become bloated virtual machines that execute megabytes of arbitrary code with every page load.

  • TWeaK@lemmy.todayEnglish
    95·
    2 days ago

    Alternate headline: Firefox is now the only browser worth using.

    And in any case, lumping Firefox as one browser is disingenuous. There are numerous Firefox forks, just like every other major browser is in fact a Google Chromium fork.

  • asudox@lemmy.asudox.devEnglish
    29·
    2 days ago

    Happy with Librewolf. I can’t imagine using my browser everyday if I don’t have a good adblocker on it like uBO.

  • nullspace@lemmy.worldEnglish
    274·
    3 days ago

    I can’t imagine using the web without firefox and ublock. Even the cookie consent popups are awful.

    • LucidNightmare@anarchist.nexusEnglish
      48·
      3 days ago

      Seriously. I clear my cookies on Firefox exit because I don’t want their shit on my computer if it isn’t needed.

      This would cause me to see them every single damn time.

      • tal@lemmy.todayEnglish
        23·
        3 days ago

        Yeah, the user experience of “just wipe cookies on browser exit” is a lot better than “have a million prompts all over zillions of sites”.

        However, regarding “every single damn time”…some sites can have their “do you want cookies” popup just blocked by the Firefox I still don’t care about cookies addon. It’s not a solution for every site out there, but it’ll get a lot of them.

        It’s also possible to use another extension, Behind the Overlay on some sites. This does require a click, so manual action, but it tries to identify “pop-over” content that covers up the browser window and remove it with that click. It’s really intended as a more-general solution to “pop-over” stuff, but cookie pop-ups often take this form and can be dismissed.

        • refreeze@lemmy.worldEnglish
          23·
          3 days ago

          You can also just enable one of the “Cookie notices” lists in your ublock settings, no need for another extension.

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          1·
          2 days ago

          have a million prompts all over zillions of sites”.

          I’m using Ghostery to automatically reject all of those. They pop-in and almost immediately disappear.

          • JackbyDev@programming.devEnglish
            1·
            1 day ago

            Ghostery blocks trackers then sells data about your tracking blocking habits. It was the first tracker blocker I heard of but Privacy Badger is the better one nowadays.

            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyzEnglish
              1·
              5 hours ago

              Not true since 2017 (and even before that it was kinda’ disputed). The adblock part of the business went to Cliqz, a German privacy-focused browser, backed by Mozilla.

              I have downvoted your comment because it’s repeating a popular myth, nothing against you personally.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zoneEnglish
        16·
        3 days ago

        vivaldi recently disabled uBO and said it’d soon be unsupported. you can re-enable for now

        • charade_you_are@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          9·
          2 days ago

          I was using vivaldi and they were kind enough(seriously) to inform me that they don’t support ublock anymore maybe a week ago.

          Not sure about the reason but I think that it’s a technical thing the Google changed to deliberately make it easy to end ublock on a lot of browsers. Might not be the only reason(actual tech upgrades) but I believe it’s part of the reason since major conspiracies seem much more likely these days.

          Anyway, I switched back to Librewolf even though it can’t play x.265 files (jellyfin). Anything that kills the use of ublock is dead to me even though they have their own shitty, bullshit blocking solution. It’s never going to be as good as ublock edit grammar and shit

          • im_fine_sandy@nord.pubEnglish
            4·
            2 days ago

            It’s not a conspiracy. It’s been a very well published and discussed process.

            There are exceptions but browsers are either reconfigurations of firefox, like librewolf, or reconfigurations of google chrome, like vivaldi.

            Some dweeb will be along in a moment to tell us all how vivaldi is not merely a reconfiguration, but the point is …

            google changed the manner in which plugins can interact with the web page you see. In recent months you could re-enable the old plugin interface by recompiling with a different configuration, but once google makes a change that breaks that old interface then you can’t just re-enable it.

            • charade_you_are@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              1·
              22 hours ago

              Admittedly, I haven’t tried too hard to get it working in any of the FF browsers lately…my unraid server blew up and it was handling hardware acceleration with a cheap intel vid card. I haven’t felt like messing with until now so I’ll give it a shot. Thanks for the info

              edit: no transcoding when l tried an x.265 in regular firefox. sweet

        • Holytimes@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          14·
          2 days ago

          No, you should forget brave it’s yet another piece of shit chrome knock off. Just like the rest. It ain’t immune. It can kick and scream but either the entire project dies or they bend the knee eventually.

    • Psythik@lemmy.worldEnglish
      20·
      3 days ago

      Ublock Lite still works in Chrome (and it still blocks YouTube ads, not sure about cookie popups), but you get no control over the filters. Just a slider with some presets to choose from. So while better than nothing, just stick with Firefox.

      • Wildmimic@anarchist.nexusEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        Now that MV2 is dead in chrome, i wouldn’t bet on YouTube ads being able to be blocked by UBlock Lite for much longer.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          2 days ago

          Pretty sure I’ve read months ago that the maintainers said they’ll try to support it as long as possible but at the moment v2 support is removed from the source code, they’ll won’t have the resources to add it back again.

  • Victoria@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    313·
    3 days ago

    If they ever stop supporting it I will continue to use the last version to support it, any website that breaks compatibility with this Firefox version can get fucked.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish
      190·
      3 days ago

      That’s a significant security risk, unfortunately.

      If that happens, I’d suggest a fork with a built in blocker, one that still gets security patches from upstream Firefox.

      • St.Elsewhere@threads.net@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        114·
        3 days ago

        Exactly. Ublock origin is notable only for being part of 0 ad companies and 100% trustworthy. The blocking lists are universal. If it’s built into the browser, you’re golden

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish
          57·
          3 days ago

          Well…

          With a fork, one is very dependent on the browser dev. Not just on their benevolence, but on their security practices too. And on them pulling in upstream security patches, quickly.

          TBH, this is why I do finance stuff on vanilla Firefox. I love browser forks, I really do, but I’m a bit more cautious with them, too.

            • brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              3 days ago

              True, sometimes. But they don’t have the sheer manpower dedicated to security that Mozilla has, nor the institutional policies that try to mitigate losing a key/account or something like that. Also, technically, vanilla Firefox is first to get the zero-day patches before they filter downstream.

              Not that the forks are dangerous or anything, generally.

        • ruby@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          5·
          3 days ago

          i mean… blocking lists are universal, but the other features ublock offers are not - i’m making heavy use of ublock’s dynamic filtering panel and per-site switches. one important thing i use ublock for is to whitelist which sites get javascript permissions and to get rid of remote fonts to make pages more readable. those features need manifest v2.

          if firefox drops manifest v2 and you’re relying purely on those inbuilt blocking lists then you might as well use the manifest v3 version of ublock without seeing a difference, right?

          • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            2·
            2 days ago

            if firefox drops manifest v2

            I think they said they will go out of their way to keep the extension APIs in Mv3 that uBlock needs

          • amorpheus@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            2 days ago

            you might as well use the manifest v3 version of ublock without seeing a difference, right?

            Can confirm, I was thinking about switching off of Chrome due to this but since I don’t use the custom stuff (much) I’m not noticing a difference with the v3 compatible “light” version of uBlock Origin.

    • anon_8675309@lemmy.worldEnglish
      34·
      3 days ago

      I’ll just spend my reading time reading more books than I do now. Forcing me to look at ads will not work.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        2 days ago

        librewolf does not have much developer capacity to maintain such heavy patches. you may remember some chromium forks telling they will maintain a patch when google completely removes this API from chromium, but it seems none of them will follow through. I can’t really fault them because it is likely a gargantuan task. but I’ll fault them for claiming something they (should) have known they can’t deliver. but my point is if vivaldi and others can’t keep it, how could librewolf?