CHROME TO KILL AD BLOCKERS AND TAMPERMOKNEY 2023 (Manifest v2 depracation) + TIPS

[264]

Starting January 2023, chrome will be ending support for chrome extensions using manifest v2 https://www.techflazy.com/135.html
Manifest V2 has been the standard for chrome extension development since 2019
Manifest V3 is replacing it, due to "security concerns" (money loss), manifest v3 essentially makes it extremely difficult to execute code on the page.

Rather than intercepting a request and modifying it procedurally, the extension asks Chrome to evaluate and modify requests on its behalf.

Remotely hosted code is no longer allowed; an extension can only execute JavaScript that is included within its package.

Commonly used extensions like adblockers and tampermonkey, will no longer be able to function

uBlock Origin Lite is the a good example of what to expect going forward for adblockers. It is a chrome extension developed using Manifest v3 and is is awful.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detai...hcphecmpfh

If you find these extensions essential to your web browsing experience you will be forced to change browsers coming in 2023
https://brave.com/ Brave is a good option if you want something with a ltf of features built on chrome
It will stay supporting manifest v2 but due to it being built on chrome, https://community.brave.com/t/chrome-ext...t-v3/43255 states that they are being pressured by google to also follow, if/when this is happening is unknown that link is a good TLDR
I see a few issues with Brave:

Show ContentSpoiler:

1. They have aligned themselves implicitly with conservative politics and issues. It's not explicit, they won't tell a liberal not to use their browser, but the circumstances under which the browser came about, it's name, and it's leadership send a certain message IMO. This may or may not be a "deal killer" for any given individual user, but it is something some people may want to know.
   
2. Brave has been caught in various schemes such as where when you type a URL to a cryptocurrency link, the browser at one point would redirect you to a different URL that generates them money. Every time they are caught doing something like that and it becomes publicized, they say it was unintentional, and change it. Whether you believe it is unintentional or not is, again, up to you as a user, but the sheer number of times this stuff has happen lead me to believe they are constantly testing to see what users will notice or let them get away with, and pulling back only if it is noticed and there is a backlash. That means, I think, logically, that there is a reasonable possibility that they are testing new schemes today and that people just haven't discovered them yet, and that if they are discovered and disliked by the users, they may be stopped and new ones will be attempted. Actually, that users are potentially being exposed to things that they don't know about, to me is worse than if they upfront said "Here's what we're doing", because the latter would let the user make an informed choice, whereas the former does not.
   
3. The entire premise of the browser, and this they are open about, is to replace the native ads on websites (Or the ad networks the website owners sign up for and try to have displayed) with Brave's own ads. Brave says they will give a cut back to the website, but only if the website asks, and since Brave is a relatively small browser, not every website asks. Also, it puts Brave in a power position with those websites where they can say "We take whatever cut we want, you can accept our terms and get what we determine your cut to be, or get nothing. It's up to you.". Now, one could argue that, hey, millions of browser users out there use content-blockers or ad-blockers and the website owners get no revenue from those views (Though some of said users might forward links to other users who don't use ad-block, indirectly generating some profit, or directly sign-up for premium membership or donate to a website), and that something is better than nothing. Still, many users wonder why they are helping Brave at the expense of the website owner financially. Users can opt-out and just block all ads, but you can do that on lots of browsers (Like the two I linked to) with extensions, and sometimes without.
   
4. The Brave user interface (UI) is very similar to Chrome's and hard to modify extensively. So, if you prefer a different interface, like maybe something on desktop that's a little more "classic" looking with more buttons and dropdown menus and such, you're out of luck. Firefox and Vivaldi on desktop can both be modified in that direction and in other directions if you so choose. Some people don't care about that, and Firefox isn't as customizeable UI wise as it once was, but it is still more customizeable than Brave, and, in all fairness, basically every Chromium-based browser on Windows, except Vivaldi, which has a lot of options for changing the UI.
   
5. On Android, Chrome and Chromium offer no native extensions. Brave follows the same path. One thing Brave does legitimately have over standard Chrome and Chromium on Android is that it does include it's own ad-blocker (Which can be turned on or off, or I guess set to participate in what I mentioned in point 3). However, many users find UBlock Origin, an extension available for Iceraven and Firefox, among others, on Android, superior in functionality, and there are a variety of other ad-blockers that some might prefer instead for their own reasons. Additionally, though an ad or content-blocker is probably the number one extension people like to install, there are also extensions for a zillion other things that people might want to modify, so simply saying "We've got a built-in ad-blocker" even if it meets a given user's needs, for many users is not a substitute for a full extension ecosystem like some other browsers have. I should mention, to be fair, that Vivaldi for Android also just has a native ad-blocker instead of an extension setup- that is common for Chromium-based Android browsers because Chrome doesn't offer extensions for mobile. There was a browser that allowed users to install Chrome desktop extensions to a Chromium-based Android browser, but it stopped being updated, which is a security risk. This means to get a full extension ecosystem on Android on a browser that is updated regularly, one almost has to use something that is Firefox-based or Firefox-compatible (Which Iceraven is) rather than Chromium-based or Chrome-compatible (Which Brave is.), at least for now.
   
6. One element of the scheme in point 3 is that regular users can generate a small amount of a cryptocurrency for themselves, potentially. However, this is a Brave-created cryptocurrency (Not Bitcoin or something common that's usable) and the amount is very low. My impression is that very few people if any get anything substantial, and then if they get, I don't know, 50 cents worth, it is very hard to turn that into 50 actual cents in regular currency or in a gift card or anything like that. It's sort of like Monopoly money, you know?
   
7. Though people don't actually make out from the scheme alluded to in point 6, people feel that they might and attempt to do so. This leads to them talking up the browser everywhere and sometimes sending out affiliate links where they get "something" (or so they hope/believe) every time someone new clicks through their link, downloads, and uses the browser, so it is very hard to tell if someone talking the browser up truly is doing so entirely because they like the experience of browsing the web with it, or because they are trying to make money off of getting you to join them. Even comments without an affiliate link could be said to sometimes be getting people into looking to try it, and then maybe later they will ask for the link or look for a link, and it'll be the one someone has tied to their account. This is sort of sad both for the people who are sort of tricked into using the browser believing they've read a genuine account of people who think it's the best when in fact the people have an alterior motive sometimes (Although, granted, maybe some of them think it's really the best *and* are trying to get these points or whatever), and also for the people posting the affiliate links and the praise themselves, because what they earn isn't real money, isn't worth very much, and is very hard to spend, so they really are doing work and selling themselves for nothing or for third-world poverty wages
   

I personally use hardened firefox, which is not built on chrome. Firefox is good out of the box but requires a lot of tweaking if you want to use with privacy in mind (disabling telementry etc)
Firefox does not have any of the concerns I have with brave and I see little to no compatibility issues with websites
Firefox: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/
Hardening: https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/


TLDR: chrome changes the way extensions work in 2023, switch browsers.

[14]

I guess this would be good for folks who normalize Chrome.

Chrome was the favorite for downloading, MS Edge is stepping the competition up a notch recently.

[264]

I guess this would be good for folks who normalize Chrome.

Chrome was the favorite for downloading, MS Edge is stepping the competition up a notch recently.

edge is also chromium based and has stated they will stop support in June 2023 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/micros...anifest-v3

[14]

I guess this would be good for folks who normalize Chrome.

Chrome was the favorite for downloading, MS Edge is stepping the competition up a notch recently.

edge is also chromium based and has stated they will stop support in June 2023 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/micros...anifest-v3

Ah,
This is interesting and good to know.

It's like Edge is still fairly new, didn't last that long eh; if it does go away next year.

[264]

This is a bump

[1]

Отремонтировать стиральную машину.