Technology

37713 readers

518 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Los@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

221

Google Chrome will limit ad blockers starting June 2024 (arstechnica.com)

submitted 11 months ago by DolphinMath@slrpnk.net to c/technology@beehaw.org

81 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The "Manifest V3" rollout is back after letting tensions cool for a year.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (6 children)

Adguard and pihole rely on DNS redirects - googs has already implemented “secure DNS” for Chrome in Android, which circumvents network level/local DNS by connecting to a Google owned DNS, serving content using those listings instead.

You can chose many different neutral DNS in AdGuard/Pihole and also in Android (quad9, for instance). In Android I use my own AdGuard Home instance as my DoT server.

They’ll likely bring this to all flavors of Chrome.

Inbuilt AdBlockers work well and wont' be affected by MV3, as they are not extensions. Don't spread FUD.

Yes, one should use Firefox.

No need to be so masochistic and I wouldn't use it regardlessly. I don't want to give undeserved market share to corrupt Mozilla Corp. I'd rather watch ads. But, as I said, there's no need for that, because between DNS blocker and inbuilt adblockers of better browsers, I haven't seen a single fucking ad in ages.

[–] renard_roux@beehaw.org 10 points 11 months ago (3 children)

"... corrupt Mozilla Corp ..."

Could you elaborate?

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

They believe that Mozilla taking Google's money is bad. But they think Brave surreptitiously changing urls to affiliate links and selling user data to ai bros is totally peachy.

Really, as with anyone who knows about Brave's tomfoolery but accepts it with open arms, he just seems to be a supporter of their CEO, Brendan Eich, who's a Silicon Valley douche and bigot. This seems to be supported by the particular animosity shown toward Mozilla, from where Eich was unceremoniously expelled from (due to the wave of negative PR that resulted form his being named their CEO) just before starting Brave.

Guy's a fanboy. And one that has no problem. Throwing slurs around when discussing things like software. It's best to just ignore him.

[–] reka@beehaw.org 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I mean if you're going to go Chromium-based at least use Vivaldi... Brave-s benefits minus Brave's shithousery

[–] Pat@kbin.run 5 points 11 months ago

I switched to Vivaldi a couple months ago, and previously used brave in the past before growing to dislike it. It surprises me how many brave-heads ignore Vivaldi's existence. It's just a better Brave. No crypto BS and lots of poweruser features.

load more comments (2 replies)