I really hope some team has been following the changes in Chrome/Chromium by Google to remove Manifest v2, and has been keeping a patchset that will undo the damage? Time to make a hard fork and get some funding to try to keep it going?
Multiple browsers have said they will keep support while the code is still there (in Chromium it’s still there, only disabled for now).
When it is removed from Chromium, it’s probably going to disappear for most or all major Chromium browsers.
Well I would seriously consider paying money to a team that keeps it there, if Chromium actually removes the code. I hope others will consider it as well. We need to fight this, even if it means paying some money to a foundation to do so.
Use Firefox and you don’t need to worry about that. Everything being Chromium comes with a whole lot of different problems.
i expect at least the ‘big’ ‘non megacorp’ chromium based ones like vivaldi, opera, brave to keep mv2 as long as it is possible.
but i can totally see google doing some serious mangling of the codebase to make patching-in mv2 difficult.
deleted by creator
There’s the futile hope I suppose that antitrust cases going on against Alphabet might force Google to divest Chrome from its advertising arm, so that there’s no pressure to make this whole thing worse. Hah, in my dreams.
On paper they gave the keys to the Linux foundation, but since they still pay most of the developers working on it the only thing it might achieve is taking resources away from Servo.
that would be funny, won’t happen–but funny af. google loses chrome, new owners revert mv2’s removal and go all-in on user control of their browser experience.
Correct me if I’m wrong but extensions can still be installed manually correct?
Manifest v2 extensions won’t work, the API it needs will be gone soon
Also since 2015, Google has made it VERY hard to install extensions without the web store. This extends to most chrome derivatives as well.
There are workarounds if you use ungoogled-chromium (Method 2 should work with normal chrome as well).
The functionality to run those extensions has been removed, so manual install won’t work.
Not surprising, Google is an ad company at this point.
It never was anything else
Many chromium browser have built-in adblockers and some of them are on-par with uBO. These are not extensions, so Google can’t really do anything about them. Not worried in the slightest.
Name one that is remotely on par with uBlock and is open source.
Shields.
EDIT: Let’s both save our time: "Brave bad, CEO evil, Chromium, cryptoooo, etc… ". I don’t care. Mozilla isn’t less shitty at all and Firefox is mediocre (source: have been a FF user/advocate from 2002 to 2021).
I’m not interesting in debating.
You’re not interested in debating because you’re scared of being shown how wrong you are. Don’t say anything if you don’t wish to debate anyone, it’s an open forum, in case you forgot. You don’t dictate the rules.
removed by mod
If you don’t care you shouldn’t care to tell others about it either.
As soon as you tell others, others will tell you.
Brave bad, CEO evil, Chromium, cryptoooo, etc… Bullshit browser.
Brave bad, CEO evil, Chromium, cryptoooo, etc… Bullshit browser.
You people are so dumb, predictable and obtuse… Welcome to my blocklist :-)
Welcome to my blocklist :-)
Wow there’s so many awesome people here :O
Cringe.
Blocked.
I am from Germany and it is just sad how many people use these apps from shit companies without thinking, when suitable alternatives exist everywhere. Just use Firefox, it will work for 99,9% without any flaw. I would love to ditch WhatsApp, but could only convinge a few people to change to Signal. It is as easy as downloading a new app to prevent supporting Meta, but that’s too much effort for many :-(
I take this as a sign that it genuinely still works to block ads and hasn’t sold out and become malware like those others that used to be popular.
It was removed because Google did away with manifest v2 for browser extensions, and uBlock Origin worked almost entirely from a feature provided in manifest v2. So it was removed because it can no longer work on chromium devices, unless the browser manually adds back in support for it. Firefox has chosen to continue to support manifest v2, so the original uBlock origin is still available. uBlock lite is still available in the chrome store, and uses the new manifest v3. It is more limited in it’s capability, but should be able to get the most obtrusive stuff. The lite version is definitely not nearly as powerful as the original.
On a side note, it seems to me like the link still works for now. Idk how much longer that will last.
Chrome is no longer available on my computer.
I only use chrome for my work stuff, and that’s because I work with g-suite a lot.
Chrome fucking sucks
Never has been 🔫 (at least for a couple of years)
I wish I could say the same. Web dev. 🫡 But at least I’m using Chromium, if that’s even slightly better.
Chrome? I’ve heard of that once.
This is probably the single thing that got me to switch to Firefox. Privacy whatever, I don’t care about my data or the morality of my tech company or whatever, but mess with my adblocker and goodbye.
i was able to load it in a (not chrome) chromium-based browser without issue, just the notice across the addon’s page.
the ‘lite’ version is also on there, seems to work ‘ok’. adguard and a few others are also there–they must all be mv3, as only the full ubo has the warning notice on its page of those i checked.
all the mv3 ones run the risk of having updates rejected or delayed by google, especially if they contain code or filter updates (filters must be packed with the addon in mv3) to combat changes google makes to their own sites. firefox or a trusted customized build or maintained fork is the way to go now.
Chrome is no longer available in my Start menu.
Been a loooong time
But my time is finally near…
Yeah, I switched to Firefox when this whole Manifest V3 thing was announced, I only still have Chrome installed because it’s better for PDFs than Firefox and once in a great while i run into a site that doesn’t work right on Firefox.
I actually really like Firefox for reading pdf’s, how is it in chrome? I’ve never actually tried chrome for that because I was still using okular back when I still had chrome installed on anything.
The main issue I have with Firefox is that some pdfs have this side-by-side layout (especially rpg pdfs) that Firefox respects and I keep having to turn it off every time I load a new one. Chrome doesn’t respect it and shows it a page at a time like I want. My eyes don’t work too good so side by side the text is just too small.
Interesting, funny enough I have sorta the opposite problem using Firefox for PDFs: I like the side by side view of two pages and Firefox always loads books with single pages, zoomed way too far in for my taste. Have you tried it for PDFs recently? It’s a new way of reading them for me, and I wonder if they’ve changed it since you used it last.
better for PDFs
Sumatra!
Or in my app drawer
or in ~/.local/share/applications
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/ublock-origin-lite/ddkjiahejlhfcafbddmgiahcphecmpfh
Doesn’t cover 100% of what uBO did, but it still works just as good IMO with DNS based ad-blocking on top.
Thanks!!
Surprised so few people are aware of this. It seems equivalent to me when you give it the same permissions Ublock Origin had.
Agreed. I haven’t even found anything that it doesn’t block that UbOrigin did.
But then the whack-a-mole game continues, and you’re constantly having to find new extensions to serve the same task. When you could simply switch to firefox, deal with the very minor growing pains, and keep using uBlock with no problems whatsoever.
Always has been.
I was a super early adopter for firefox. I started using it back in 2005-2006. I’m pretty sure it was still in beta when I started using it.
Over the past 20 years I’ve watched while firefox users have formed a goddamn cult around a software. It’s insane to me, especially because I’m seeing exactly the same things from Mozilla that I was seeing from Microsoft (and later Google) at the time I decided to switch from IE to firefox to begin with…
Firefox isn’t special. It’s falling for all the cloud-based privacy invasive enshittification that Chrome has so far. It’s just getting there slower.
So cool your jets. Especially considering uBlock Origin Lite is uBlock Origin. It’s just compatible with the Manifest V3 standard.
That was a loud ball drop from Google’s hands.
But ublock origin lite is by the same dev… Not as many features but it conforms to the new rules and is still much better than not having a blocker if you use chrome or edge.
The best option here is to just tank Chrome’s market share instead of making something that’s obviously not ideal, work.
Missing critical features:
Filter lists only update with the extension, you cannot update them dynamically
No making your own filters and thus no element picker for blocking annoyances on a webpage (a feature so good apple literally baked it into safari)
No support for external lists (which means if you back up your own filters into a list you cannot easily reimport)
No changing behavior on a per site basis
A number of other features as well that are more strictly power user features but still really handy like dynamic filtering and strict blocking domains.
If you have the option stop using chrome and edge, they are some of the worst options you could choose. Even outside of adblock and manifest v3 chrome is horrendous for data harvesting bullshit and edge isn’t great. If you don’t have the option because of an overzealous it dept or whatever and are forced to use it ubo lite is your best option probably and my heart goes out to you
I’m a bit confused as an Adblock Plus user, why did the ublock dev drop those features? ABP uses manifest v3 too and it still has all of those. So it’s clearly not about them being impossible.
According to Adblock Plus’ own blog post about the matter:
With Manifest V3, Adblock Plus is required to limit how many filter lists we have available to users. We’ll have the ability to offer up to 100 pre-installed filter lists that you can turn on and off depending on your preferences. From these available filter lists, users will be able to choose 50 that they can keep turned on at any given time. We’re working to ensure that popular filter lists our users love are supported by us, and that any updates to these lists are brought to you by frequent new releases of the extension. This does mean that initially, our users will no longer be able to subscribe to any filter lists outside of what is provided in the extension.
Re: Element Blocker:
The Block element feature will continue to exist even after the Manifest V3 version of Adblock Plus officially launches. Manifest V3 does require us to adhere to limits with filter lists and user created blocking rules, so there’s a chance things may change in the future. However, we don’t have details quite yet! If you have any more questions about this or anything else, our support team are the best people to ask at [email protected].
So this says to me that baked in filter lists are now required, custom lists will not work, and Block Element is probably functioning illegally if it is indeed still functioning though that may change in the future in either direction.
Changing blocker behavior on specific sites is the only thing in that list that I see UBO disallow and ABP not mention at all. Not sure why that was changed.
I’ve read that too, but I still have the ability to add a custom list. It says initially, so I assumed they got around that issue by now, considering it isn’t the case for me.
I technically use Edge which afaik still allows MV2, so in case the extension somehow implements both and defaults to mv2 if available, I’ve decided to install Chrome and get ABP there to test. Even in Chrome, the ability to add a custom list is still there. As are all the other features, like manual updating. With custom list I mean both the ability to add a list per URL, and the ability to add custom arbitrary rules directly.
I don’t really see why element blocking wouldn’t be possible or allowed under Manifest v3. Like, it’s entirely client-side. Manifest never comes into play there.
What I can imagine is that custom lists might work that same way too, removing the ads from the page after they’ve already loaded rather than blocking the web request directly which is afaik how adblocking works in mv2. I can’t tell you if that’s the case or not.
Lol who downvoted this
Probably because of the Adblock Plus mention. It’s mired in controversy because of its acceptable ads toggle and requiring ad giants to pay for it. So I can imagine people downvoting comments that put it in a positive light compared to other adblockers.
You may be right, but whether you hate ABP specifically or not should be irrelevant to the question. The question was why other extensions - like Adblock - can have those feature but uBlock Lite can’t. What’s different?
I’d also like to know, personally. I’d wondered the same thing.
Or just use Firefox
Or just use a fork of firefox. Firefox isn’t looking very favorable lately.
Who will develop the underlying browser then?
I’m giving Floorp a try right now. It’s actually pretty good.
Try zen browser too!
Firefox was stubborn enough not to support H.265 till JUST recently and only on windows… Doesn’t work with my 4k security cameras as well as Chrome or Safari based browsers.
H.265 is patent encumbered. Blame the 2 or 3(?) patent pool holders (for-profit corporations, unlike non-profit -and-slowly-losing-market-share Mozilla) for not making it free to use for everyone.
This is why AV1 is preferred, it saves bandwidth and there’s no threat of being sued into oblivion.
My work uses a web-based interface that’s very annoying to use on Firefox. I’m unfortunately tied to Chrome in the meantime, so uBlock lite is a lifesaver.
Recently switched to Waterfox from Firefox and loving it. Much faster than the latter and I can use all of my add ons.
Haven’t used Chrome in years so they can suck it.
