logoalt Hacker News

crazygringo10/11/20241 replyview on HN

I don't think any of that is accurate though.

Manifest v3 blocks user tracking -- if the request is blocked, any tracking attached to it is blocked. I'm sure it's not 100% perfect, but it's certainly working well enough in practice.

And what malware are you talking about? If a request is blocked, it's blocked. It doesn't matter if it's an ad or malware.

Manifest v3 is better at #4, because the junk isn't loaded, and the blocking is more efficient in terms of CPU.

And then #5 I don't know what you're talking about. I use Stylus and Tampermonkey to customize webpages and they continue to work great.

So I just don't see the evidence that "Google is 100% boiling the frog here". That's what everyone was saying, but now that Manifest v3 has come out, I just see adblocking that continues to work and uses less CPU to do it.

I see a lot of fearmongering around Google, but now that the results are in with Manifest v3... they just don't seem true. You're making all these claims, but I just don't see the evidence now that we're seeing how it works in practice.


Replies

Spunkie10/11/2024

Explain to me how uBlock Origin can realistically go from 100,000 to 500,000 dynamic rules down to 30k rules(only 5k of those can be dynamic) in the Lite version without losing the ability to actually block everything?

These limits are easy targets for ad networks to overwhelm or outmaneuver.

    That's what everyone was saying
Everyone was saying that the new API is less capable than the old API at blocking things. DeclarativeNetRequest IS less capable; that's just a fact.

No one was saying that adblockers would literally stop working, so it's beyond disingenuous to dismiss people's issues with these changes by just saying 'works for me'.

What evidence would you actually accept anyway? Do you need a leaked internal document from Google saying literally 'devs, go neuter adblockers' before you believe Google might have bad intentions surrounding people's ability to block ads and tracking?

If security and performance were the actual driving forces of DeclarativeNetRequest, then they would have simply added it in addition to the existing webRequest block functionality. uBlock Origin and most extensions would have happily moved the majority of their rules to the static list if it meant better performance and privacy while keeping around the webRequest blocks for the things that actually need it.

Google has gone from having only one nuclear-level option for influencing adblockers (aka delisting) to now having its boot softly pressed against their necks and plenty of levers to pull. And you want me to look at that and go, 'There's no direct evidence of malicious intention there... so perfectly normal and/or acceptable behavior by the world's biggest ad company'?

show 2 replies