company which makes most of it’s revenue from advertising fucks with their browser’s ability to remove ads. Go figure!
I have to say I’m not surprised. No one wants to pay for a browser.
The irony is that Chrome’s rendering engine was a fork of WebKit, which was a fork of KHTML, a free and open source rendering engine created by KDE for Konqueror. They basically took something free, used Microsoft’s “embrace, extend, extinguish” tactics on it. Now KHTML is vestigial, only found in the UserAgent string.
But we could have had a truly free open source cross platform browser with Konqueror.
Best we have now is Firefox, but the bulk of Mozilla’s development funding comes from setting Google as the default search. So it is also hijackable.
We could maybe have done that. But Konqueror has never been that good every time I tried it.
In circa 2003-2004, it was as close to on par with browsers at the time as it would get. I think the WebKit fork did damage to the momentum. By 2008 with KDE4, the rework that split it and Dolphin into to products was basically the final nail I think, as development work effectively stopped.
This is gonna be so bad because now there is only uBlock origin lite and “uBlock”, if you couln’t guess: the 2nd one is a scam that google never tried to remove(it’s been up for some years IIRC) and i am sure that everyone will try to install this scam because they can’t find the original uBlock origin (and everyone just refers to uBlock origin as uBlock which makes it worse)
Ublock Origin Lite still works on Ungoogled Chromium for me, at least.
Lite was made for Manifest V3. They had to drop a bunch of features to get it functioning which is why it’s called “Lite”.
the real problem isn’t Chrome, it’s Chromium
I disagree. There are decent browsers built on chromium. Chrome insists on being awful
what I meant was, Chromium’s influence and control on the whole web
Big win for Firefox.
Not really. UBlock Origin Lite works really well. They even added content scripts recently. From a technical perspective MV3 offers more security by default.
In practice, I found it breaks sites more, lets some things through, triggers more adblock detectors, and doesn’t work as well with the annoyance list.
It doesn’t work on YouTube. And the maximum number of entries to block is limited.
Its not catastrophic though.
So UBO Lite is not wholly ineffective, no. It works great, mostly. Buts its definitely more of a nuisance to use, which is exactly what Google wants.
Thanks for the laugh! Keep telling yourself that.
Firefox is Chrome with extra steps
Care to elaborate? It’s actually not like chrome at all. The engine is different, it’s not Google, they haven’t blocked manifest v2 plugins… Other than being a web browser, how would you classify it as Chrome?
I guess they could be referring to how much money Google throws at Mozilla to keep Google Search as standard in Firefox? Still, it’s a tenuous link at best
In about:config check with what google services, urls, relays, vpns browser communicates. What organizations donate most money.
Hardly makes it “Chrome with extra steps”.
Did you actually look inside?
I don’t have to. Yea, it shares some backend Google services, but the rest of the browser, like the other 90% isn’t Chrome. It’s like comparing Windows and Mac OS and saying that they’re the same because they both connect to the same Internet and that their operating systems. Just like Chrome v Firefox, they are two distinctly different products.
