Google announced that starting in June 2024, ad blockers such as #uBlock Origin will be disabled in Chrome 127 and later with the rollout of Manifest V3 (#Mv3).

The new #Chrome manifest will prevent using custom filters and stops on demand updates of blocklist. Only #Google authorized updates to browser extension will be allowed in the future, which mean an automatic win for Google in their battle to stop YouTube #AdBlockers .

#ManifestV3 is deceitful and threatening to your privacy, and now is a good time to switch to #Firefox (@mozilla) and/or #TorBrowser (@torproject) if you haven't done so already!

EFF (@eff) on Google’s Manifest V3:

⚠️⁠https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-manifest-v3-deceitful-and-threatening
⚠️⁠https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/googles-manifest-v3-still-hurts-privacy-security-innovation

Chrome Manifest V3 Transition Timeline (2023-11-16)

🚩⁠https://developer.chrome.com/blog/resuming-the-transition-to-mv3/

Mozilla Firefox

Desktop
📥⁠https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/

Android Play Store
📥⁠https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.mozilla.firefox

iOS App Store
📥⁠https://apps.apple.com/us/app/firefox-private-safe-browser/id989804926

Tor Browser

Desktop
📥⁠https://www.torproject.org/download/

Android Play Store
📥⁠https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.torproject.torbrowser

Fdroid Repo
📥⁠https://support.torproject.org/tormobile/tormobile-7/

iOS App Store (try OnionBrowser)
📥⁠https://onionbrowser.com/

#Firefox #Mozilla #TorBrowser #Tor #Browser #Privacy

@catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff Or, use an adblocker that doesn't run in the browser, like AdGuard. It blocks ads everywhere, including non-browser apps.

@SDWolf @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff those rely on advertising domains being different from those with useful content. also they are trivially detected and you can’t circumvent adblock-blockers using them

@catsalad Mozilla is not an alternative. Sadly.
They missed their opportunity and became a cheap Chrome copy.
Also... No PWA, and permanent active backdoor.

@Arsimael @catsalad I've heard this refrain about Firefox a lot and I've never understood it. How is it just a cheap Chrome copy? Because it uses Chrome's Manifest V2 for extensions? That's the only thing I can think of, as the underlying browser stack is entirely different and the UI isn't remotely reminiscent of Chrome. Everything else minus Safari is just a cheap Chrome copy because it's literally just Chromium, and even still Safari is just a lateral move from Chrome because it uses WebKit, which Chrome still essentially uses just with a forked version of its WebCore.

The lack of PWA support is a valid criticism, granted I think Mozilla made the right call to divest resources from it in desktop (as it works on their mobile browser) if it meant taking a lot of work to get running, as it's a fairly niche feature on desktop.

Last... what permanent active backdoor? ​

@Arsimael
@catsalad
No PWA is just not true and I don't know what you mean by 'became a cheap chrome copy' when literally every other browser (excluding safari) literally **is** chrome

@Arsimael @catsalad
False.

@silo_bear @catsalad Dude, this isn't Twitter. If you challenge someone's opinion, you should give a reason or explain yourself.

@BentiGorlich @catsalad last time I checked, FF wasn't able to do PWA. And I'm talking about native. Not with some third party stuff.
And no everything else isn't "chrome" it's webkit/blink based. Chrome is also just one product which comes from chromium. Like dozens others.
Don't get me wrong. Google is cancer and Googles influence on Chromium is cancer. But Chrome is not the root of everything.

Oh, and BTW, Safari is also using Webkit.

Currently, "use Mozilla instead of chrome" is nothing more than "Use horseshit instead of bullshit".
And why is Mozilla a cheap copy of chrome? Because Chrome gets a new feature, and Mozilla copies it. Starting with their versioning madness, continuing with their backdoors.

@Arsimael
@catsalad

What do you mean by 'Safari is also using webkit'? Neigher Chrome nor FF use webkit afaik...

And while I agree that mozilla should focus more on the core and not on featuees nobody asked for, I much rather use a browser that is really open source and of which a bunch of more privacy focused forks exist, than the dominant player which tries so hard to make FF usable on their sites...

I use FF privately and for work and I am very happy with it

Attached: screenshot with PWA

@Arsimael @catsalad
Firefox can be configured for total privacy.
Chromium and chrome cannot.
Simple as.

@silo_bear @catsalad And how does this void my comment? Just because FF is better at one thing (which it isn't, search for Firefox Normandy), doesn't mean it's not a shirty product. Firefox still has no PWA and copies Features from Chrome in a bad way.

@BentiGorlich @catsalad
My comment was because it was mentioned that safari is different from Chrome. Chromium is using Bink as engine. And blink is a fork of webkit. Blink has some optimizations and uses some other techniques, but there's no real difference between webkit and blink if it comes to website rendering.

And what do you mean by "true open source"? AFAIK chromium is open source.
https://github.com/chromium/chromium

Chromium is no more or less 'open' than Firefox.

The problem is not the open source, it's the overwhelming power a few companies have in the project. Chromium is not bad. Google and it's privacy iussues and datamining 'code is.

Mozilla is making bad decisions. If Mozilla were a good and working piece of software, it wouldn't have fallen to 3% marketshare.
And the problem isn't Googles "Overwhelming advertising and shady tricks to install Chrome" - Microsoft forced their Browser on every instal of Window, keeps people from deleting it, and still has a market share which is around 5.5%.
Mozilla beat the IE back then because it had a good Product.
Bit sadly, that Product was overthrown by a better, in this case, faster product.
I see you are also capable to read German. So here's something to read: https://github.com/chromium/chromium

Tanks for the hint with the PWAs.But I am still talking about a native support. Not via some addons. FF isn'T capable of installing and using PWAs without installing some sort of Extension or addon. At least not in the current 119.0 Version.

@BentiGorlich @catsalad
And just to mention it: I don't try to 'convince' anyone that Chrome is good. (It isn't) - I just can'T stand the constant "Chromium is evil and Firefox is good" Mindset.

Firefox is the fucking same as Chrome. Mozilla ALSO collects userdata, is ALSO tracking its users and is ALSO putting backdoos for "management purposes" into their Browser. They are simply not as good as Google in hiding it, make more fuckups and are loosing more and more users over it.

That makes them not 'underdogs' in the Browser market. That also doesn't make them 'trustworthy'.
That makes them a bunch of people which try to provide a good browser and fail because of stupid decissions from their management.

That could be made better to improve Firefox?
1. Disable Normandy as default
2. Remove Trackers from the browser
3. Provide an own sync server for browser profiles, with a working documentation, and a setup which doesn't require several compuzter science degrees to run.
There are raspis. Make it as easy as it is to run pihole.

@Arsimael @catsalad
Well that's like, your opinion man. My opinion is decided by metrics.

@Arsimael
@catsalad
Yes Mozilla does track you as well, but they do not have the same incentive to do so, simply because they are not running a corporation and are not alsp an ad company.

The problem I have with the things you say is that Mozilla is as bad as google and that is not true. They are not a de facto monopoly in Search, Ad and mobile OS market. And they are a foundation, not a corporation which just makes an immense difference.

@silo_bear @catsalad which metrics? The Metrics which state that Mozilla has a more and more declining userbase?
I know you can understand German, so here's a short read for you:
https://it-native.de/mozilla-what-the-fuck-is-wrong-with-you/

It's from 2020. And sadly, it didn't change much since then. Mozilla has just even less users.

@Arsimael
And the thing is that diversity in the browser engines is really important and we lost it. Google is in a position to dictate what can be done and what can't because rveryone uses their open source but not opem to contribution rendering engine V8

@Arsimael
The PWA thing does not require any 3rd party addon... Its just natively there. The install button is to install thr PWA...

@BentiGorlich im running FF 119 on arch. Vanilla, no addons.
And no PWA.

If I search for "Firefox use PWA", all I get is 'Install this extension" or "compile that add on".
Sorry, It's simply not working.

If it comes to open source but not open to contribution: How is FF different? You can't contribute there too.
And FF is less evil because there's not a Corp behind it? Sorry, but that's Bullshit.

If it steals my data and keeps an open backdoor to my system I don't care if it's a Megacorp or a small Foundation. Backdoor is backdoor.
That's non negotiable.

@Arsimael
Ok, then I missunderstood you. On desktop I have no clue. My screenshot was taken on Android and there I don't have to install anything else to have working PWAs...

Lets just part ways here and agree to disagree. I won't change my mind about chrome beeing far more evil and you won't change your mind about FF beeing just as evil.
For me the corporation part makes all the difference. And even if Mozilla does shady stuff too, it will always be less evil to me because its a foundation.

@BentiGorlich Chrome IS more evil than FF. That's out of question. I wrote it earlier somewhere.

Let me give you a different metaphor:

If you get mugged by the Mafia, or by an unorganized small group of muggers doesn't make a difference. You are still getting mugged. It's the same crime.

The difference in size makes no difference in the crime itself.

I just refuse to say 'I prefer the small group of muggers because they just try to feed their kids'.

Both deserve to be hit by law and thrown to jail.

The difference is, the Mafia needs to be hit by international law enforcement, thile the small muggers can be overthrown by a group of citizens and held until police arrives.

Yes, Google is more evil than Mozilla.

But they both are committing the same crime.

@charlotte @catsalad @eff @torproject @mozilla You're thinking of DNS filtering, which does have those limitations. AdGuard does proper content filtering before that content reaches the browser (or whatever other endpoint app) by running as a network driver or service.

@Rusty @catsalad cheap copy, because Mozilla is copying features from Chrome, and fuck it up. Starting with the bonkers versioning, continue with the broken sync stuff, down to the back doors.

And the active backdoor is called Firefox normandy.
Thats a backend which is active by default and grants Mozilla full access to your Browser.

@Arsimael @catsalad That is the most bonkers reasoning I've ever heard that something is a cheap copy of something else. What specifically about it, because instead of using smaller point releases for minor revisions they step up the whole version number? That's been a trend in software versioning in the last decade by way more software than just Chrome.

Also, doesn't Normandy just give them access for the studies? I mean, that's definitely not great, but at least you can opt-out. Unfortunately that's just corporate run software these days, they run A/B tests on their users without their knowledge. That doesn't make it excusable, especially in software that prides itself on privacy, but that doesn't make it a clone of Chrome.

@charlotte @catsalad @eff @torproject @mozilla On desktop Windows, it uses a network driver to do its filtering. On Android, it uses a local VPN.

@charlotte @catsalad @eff @torproject @mozilla Yes, TLS interception is definitely a thing it does, and it does it quite well. I'm able to watch YouTube videos in the official YouTube app ad-free on my unrooted Galaxy Fold 3.

@Rusty @catsalad Google does some BS in Chrome, and FF copies it. I'm not the only one seeing this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1fhgak/mozilla_please_stop_copying_chrome/?rdt=55445

And this post is 11 years old.
Again. If Firefox would be a GOOD alternative, FF wouldn't be down to 3% marketshare.

And no. Normandy is way more powerful. It can change the whole profile. Just read Mozilla own docs about it.

@Arsimael @catsalad Mastodon has a miniscule share of overall microblogging users. If it was a good alternative to Twitter it would have more users. Let me link a litany of angry Reddit threads about how Mastodon is terrible as the basis of my argument, because testimonials are known to be the most reliable source of information.

Firefox's decline couldn't be, y'know, market forces, divestments in Mozilla, monopolistic business practices by Apple/Google/Microsoft, the overall decline in desktop users outside of corporate settings, and the fact that overall tech literacy among the newer generation is going down. No, it's probably because they have A/B testing and made Reddit angry by simplifying the browser interface 11 years ago. Nevermind the dozens of forks that address every issue they have with Firefox without caving to giving Google a monopoly on the web with Blink.

@Rusty @catsalad Im not going to repeat my whole argumentation about marketshare, and Browser monopoly again. Please read my comments in the other threads here. If you think Mozilla is the better browser, so be it. In my opinion Mozilla does the exact same shit as Google.

@Arsimael I've read your other comments and they're not particularly illuminating. If you think Chromium should have a de facto monopoly on the web because Firefox isn't perfect, then sure, enjoy your ads.

@catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff The second paragraph is of particular importance since that also explains why AdGuard is supporting it (see Google's announcement) and the "wider ad blocking community" (i.e., all the bullshit that's not the one true blocker aka uBO) is okay with it. They sell ad blockers and lists as a product. They're okay with not blocking everything (like YT), especially if noone else can do it anymore because the competition (uBO) is sidelined.

This push is not against ad blockers actually, it's against effective ad blockers, particularly uBO.

@ljrk @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff

This business model reminds me of Adblock Plus with their "acceptable ads". The difference here is of course that Google owns major ads companies and those will be the "acceptable" ads.

Clever product managers, very clever! Now, you all had your moment - let's all use Firefox/Brave :)

@ljrk @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff "They're okay with not blocking everything (like YT)"

The problem with that theory is that AdGuard blocks YouTube ads. It also uses EasyList-syntax blocklists just like uBlock Origin does. In fact, uBlock Origin's wiki points to AdGuard's documentation as a source of information on writing blocking rules.

The only thing I've found that AdBlock don't want to block is paywalls (presumably because of the DMCA), so I just subscribe to a set of community-maintained paywall removal rules in standard format.

People should definitely switch from Chrome to Firefox, though. Google's sleazy attempt to sell user tracking in the browser as "ad privacy" is enough reason for that.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/09/googles-widely-opposed-ad-platform-the-privacy-sandbox-launches-in-chrome/

@mathew @ljrk @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff Time to say goodbye to Chrome. Is Chromium also affected?

@mathew @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff Yes, they currently do block it but they don't have much of an incentive to do so and it takes a lot of resources to keep that up to date. Right now they *have to* try blocking it to keep up with the competition.

If, with MV3, the lists have to be bundled and ack'ed by Google, there's great likelihood that this will die first. Either because the filter won't be ack'ed or because YT just updates their stuff too frequently.

Suddenly, not blocking YT becomes the norm and is considered "good enough". Much more of a comfortable position for AdGuard.

And yes, since the people around AdGuard invented the filter syntax *back then*, that's still the point of truth for the syntax. However, due to this standard, people using uBlock can also import AdGuard lists etc. With user filter import gone this feature goes away as well...

@littletree @ljrk @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff brave is kinda cringe tbh

their CEO has a history of being anti-lgbtq, brave heavily supports crypto shit, and they've previously had "scandals" with whitelisting facebook trackers, as well as injecting affiliate links into the url bar

@sdueckert @mathew @ljrk @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff it's de facto managed by the Google Chrome team as the base of Chrome. So don't expect anything else from it than from Chrome. Some other browsers based on it pledged to either retain V2 support, or implement their own adblock features (Brave, Opera, Vivaldi), while others don't, like Microsoft Edge who already stopped supporting V2.

@mathew @ljrk @catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff Mozilla is also attempting to sell spyware as “privacy-preserving,” and they partnered with Facebook to do it. Mozilla wants you to totally trust that Facebook has your back on privacy:
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/privacy-preserving-attribution-for-advertising/

There are no good browsers left.

@Rusty Nice how you try to put words in my mouth which I clearly never said or even intimated.

This isn't Twitter. So stop this disgusting 'Discussion' technique please.

Here is the thread which you are not able or willing to find.

https://social.khajiit.de/@Arsimael/111438257454760231

@Arsimael I found that thread too and found your argument equally unconvincing. But sure, you want to stop, so let's stop.

@Rusty you don't seem to read or understand what I'm writing. If you do, you would know that do not try to 'convince' anyone. I'm expressing my opinion and explain why I have this opinion.

Feel free to challenge it, but don't argue with stuff which was already said a dozen of times already, or try to put words in my mouth which I never said.

If you can't have a mature discussion, please don't try to or go to Twitter.

Thanks for understanding.

@Arsimael I'm sorry but excuse me? How's the weather up there while you smugly look down at all the plebians who don't see the vast intellect of your big Reddit brain and your absolutely pure method of online discussion? What a refined Internet denizen you are.

Sweetie, I don't know how to explain to you that capitalism is bad and software that results from it is also bad. You're so beyond reductive when it comes to this discussion that every point you make is basically "well Firefox is coded in this way that every other piece of corporate software is so it's just trying to be Chrome" and dismissing every advantage Firefox has because it's, y'know, a modern day piece of software written by a company. When I approached your discussion and effectively debunked every point you made, you shifted the goal posts. When I finally threw my hands up and said we could drop it, you huffed and stomped your little paws because, again, that wasn't the response you wanted. Move those goal posts again. Now it's not about Firefox, it's about how my ability to discuss is bad and I should feel bad.

You are incredibly immature, petulant, and honestly, just flat out wrong. You'd fit in well over here in America because you sound exactly like one of those, "Umm, ackshually? Both political parties are bad so I'm gonna vote for Trump. I'm very smart."

Muting you now because I've said me piece and, frankly, you're just annoying. Grow up.

@183231bcb @torproject @catsalad @mathew @eff @ljrk @mozilla

No... That's not what this article is describing. They explicitly state that the process they're talking about already happens! Advertisers already have a process of attribution. Mozzila is improving the system by making it so that process can no longer be used to identify you, specifically as an individual by grouping attribution together, and by making sure that not all of the data that is already gathered anyway by the current model, is broken up and sent to multiple computers instead of just one, like it currently is anyway!

And none of this matters if you use ublock and Privacy Badger anyway.

@catsalad @mozilla @torproject @eff
*shrugs* I moved to Firefox last year after being a fan of Chrome since day one. Sad to see Google shit the bed like this.