As Google tries to hinder ad-block extensions with their new platform Manifest V3, it seems to me Chrome or any Chromium derivatives are no longer a viable way to browse the web safely. So it got me wondering, how much big of a task would it be to still suport Manifest V2 on newer releases of Chromium? Maybe implement some legacy option for backwards compatibility with older extensions. I think it would be a great alternative to have, but I haven't seen anyone coming up with something similar.

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

[–] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 63 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Just use Firefox already.

[+] Nomecks@lemmy.ca -15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Remind me: who provides most of the funding that FF has?

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 32 points 2 months ago

that only reinforces that you should use firefox… forcing google to pay more money to mozilla and giving mozilla more power to negotiate is a good thing

sure google has some power over them with the money they give, but by using chromium that power is absolute - no need to pay, ask, influence when you just get

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Your point?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because of incentives it's not impossible for the Mozilla foundation to drop support for manifest V2 eventually. If Google's paying 90% of their bills, it's not unreasonable to assume they also have a say in the direction of the browser

[–] Chewy7324@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 2 months ago

I've never seen any reason to believe Google has any say in the direction of Firefox. Google pays to be the default search engine, not more, not less.

This same argument could be brought up about Safari. All other browsers are based on Chromium anyway, so they are directly developed by Google themselves.